19920769 Ver al_Complete File_19920220

U'
JAMES G. MARTIN
GOVERNOR
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
P.O. BOX 25201
RALEIGH 27611-5201
THOMAS J.HARRELSON February 11, 1992
SECRETARY
District Engineer '
Army Corps of Engineers
P. 0. Box 1890
Wilmington, North Carolina 28402
ATTENTION: Regulatory Branch
Dear Sir:
vl 9 /

FF3 N0 tf '
DIV. OF E11VI t0i`11s'Et1TAL „iG`,'tfff.
DIRECTOfc'5 OFFICE
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
WILLIAM G. MARLEY, JR., P.E.
STATE HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATOR
1
2

Subject: Categorical Exclusion Approval for Federal Aid Project: Forsyth
County, SR 1101, Bridge No. 100 over Blanket Creek, State Project
No. 6.503218, I. D. No. B-2035
Attached for your information is a copy of the project planning report for the
subject project. The project is being processed by the Federal Highway Adminis-
tration as a "Categorical Exclusion" in accordance with 23 CFR 771.115(b).
Therefore, we do not anticipate requesting an individual permit but propose to
proceed under a Nationwide Permit in accordance with Section 330.5(a)(23) of the
Interim Final Rule for Regulatory Programs issued July 22, 1982, by the Corps of
Engineers. The provisions of Section 330.5(b) and 330.6 of these regulations
will be followed in the construction of the project.
We anticipate that a permit will be required from the North Carolina
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources for this project.
DOT will apply directly to NRCD for that permit when plans have been
developed.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at
733-3141.
Sincerely, /I
. ?.a?ol.. D M
L. J. Ward, P. E., Manager
LJW/plr Planning and Environmental
Attachment
cc: Mr. John Parker, Permit Coordinator, w/report
Mr. Charles Wakild, Environmental Management, w/report
Mr. C. W. Leggett, P. E.
Mr. J. T. Peacock, Jr., P. E.
Mr. A. L. Hankins, Jr., P. E.
Mr. D. B. Waters
Branch
Ghr_?Lq
An Equal Opportunity/Affirmative Action Employer
JI'l
11
, Forsyth County, Bridge No. 100
on SR 1101 over Blanket Creek
State Project No. 6.503218
I.D. No. B-2035
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
AND
N. C. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
APPROVED:
? z/ 9z
D to ,/
a. wars, v. t., manager
lanning and Environmental Branch, NCDOT
?079Z
Date Nic of L. Graf, P. E.
FO/Z Division Administrator, FHWA

Forsyth County, Bridge No. 100
on SR 1101 over Blanket Creek
State Project No. 6.503218
I.D. No. B-2035
CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION
December, 1991
Documentation Prepared in Planning and Environmental Branch By:
is le James
Project Planning Engineer
U/0- h ga-
Wayne liott
Bridge Project Planni Engineer Unit Head
. Franklin Vick, P.E.
Assistant Manager of Planning and Environmental
0410
? SEAL
s 7754
%ti.?'•• IN it
•'•h
''?, qNK LIN `? .?`

l
Forsyth County, Bridge No. 100
on SR 1101 over Blanket Creek
State Project No. 6.503218
I.D. No. B-2035
Bridge No. 100 has been included in the current Transportation
Improvement Program. The location is shown in Figure 1. No substantial
environmental impacts are anticipated. The project has been classified as
a Federal "categorical exclusion".
I. SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS
Bridge No. 100 should be replaced at the existing location with a
pre-cast reinforced concrete box culvert as shown by Alternate 1A (see
Figure 2). Only minimum approach work is required to tie the culvert to
the existing approaches.
Preliminary hydrographic studies indicate that a double 8' x 7' box
culvert should be provided.
Traffic will be detoured along existing roads during the 2 month
construction period.
Estimated cost, based on current prices, is $ 137,000.
The estimated cost of the project, as shown in the Transportation
Improvement Program, is $ 178,000.
II. ENVIRONMENTAL COMMITMENTS
All standard procedures and measures will be implemented to avoid or
minimize environmental impacts. No special or unique environmental
commitments are required for this project.
If the State Historic Preservation Officer determines that an
intensive archaeology survey is needed for this project, the survey will
be completed prior to construction.
Approximately .01 acre of wetlands will be disrupted by the project.
Best Management Practices will be utilized to minimize these impacts.
III. EXISTING CONDITIONS
SR 1101 is classified as a rural local route in the Statewide
Functional Classification System and is not part of the Federal Aid
System.

4
2
In the vicinity of the bridge, SR 1101 has a 17-foot pavement with
8-foot shoulders (see Figure 2). Vertical alignment is generally flat.
The approaches are on a tangent alignment 200 feet either side of the
bridge. The structure is situated 9 feet above the creek bed. The
approaches are on embankments ranging up to t9 feet above natural ground.
Land use in the immediate vicinity of the bridge is primarily woodland and
farmland. Development in the surrounding area is rural residential.
The current traffic volume of 1100 VPD is expected to increase to
approximately 2000 VPD by the year 2011. The projected volume includes
0-1% truck-tractor semi-trailer (TTST) and 2% dual-tired vehicles (DT).
The speed limit is 45 MPH.
The existing bridge (see Figure 3) was constructed in 1957. The
superstructure consists of a timber deck with I-beams and timber
stringers. The substructure is composed of timber caps and piles.
Overall length is 41 feet. Clear roadway width is 17.2 feet. The
posted weight limit is 14 tons for single vehicles and 19 tons for trucks
with trailers.
Bridge No. 100 has a sufficiency rating of 11.0 compared to a rating
of 100 for a new structure.
Four accidents were reported on Bridge No. 100 during the period from
December, 1987 to November, 1990.
Four school buses cross the studied bridge daily.
III. ALTERNATIVES
Three alternative methods of replacing Bridge No. 100 were studied.
The design speed for each alternate is 60 MPH.
Alternate 1 would involve replacement of the bridge along the
existing roadway alignment with a cast-in-place reinforced concrete box
culvert (2 @ 8' x 7'). The road would be closed for approximately 4
months. Traffic would be maintained on existing local roads as shown in
Figure 1. This alternate would retain the present roadway alignment.
Alternate 1A (recommended) will involve replacement of the bridge
along the existing roadway alignment with a pre-cast reinforced concrete
box culvert (2 @ 8' x 7'). Road closure will be reduced to 2 months.
Traffic will be maintained on existing local roads as shown in Figure 1.
This alternate will retain the present roadway alignment.
Alternate 2 is identical to Alternate 1 except traffic is to be
maintained on-site with a temporary detour structure (2 @ 72" pipe)
located immediately west of the existing structure.
0
L
t
3
Consideration was given to providing a culvert on new alignment. It
was determined that no benefits or savings in costs would result.
Therefore, a relocated alignment was not considered to be a competitive
alternate.
The "do-nothing" alternative would eventually necessitate closure of
the bridge. This is not prudent due to the traffic service provided by
SR 1101.
"Rehabilitation" of the old bridge is not feasible due to its age and
deteriorated condition.
IV. ESTIMATED COST
Estimated cost of the studied alternatives is as follows:
(Recommended)
Alternate 1 Alternate 1A Alternate 2
Structure $ 50,000 $ 47,000 $ 50,000
Roadway Approaches 31,000 31,000 31,000
Detour Structure &
Approaches - - 130,500
Structure'Removal 6,000 6,000 6,000
Engineering &
Contingencies 13,000 13,000 33,000
Right-of-Way,
Utilities 40,000 40,000 42,500
Total $ 140,000 $ 137,000 $ 293,000
V. TRAFFIC DETOUR
The Division Engineer concurs that traffic can be detoured during
construction as shown in Figure 1. Approximately 2.9 miles of additional
travel will be necessary for the average vehicle affected by road closure.
A road-user analysis, based on a 2-month construction period, indi-
cates the cost of additional travel would be approximately $ 58,000. The
estimated cost of providing an on-site detour is $156,000 resulting in a
benefit-cost ratio of 0.4. This ratio indicates that detouring traffic
along secondary roads is justifiable. A concrete products company that
produces box culverts is located near the project site.
4
1
Provision of an on-site detour is not justifiable due to the availa-
bility of a suitable detour route. Detour roadways and bridges are
adequate to accommodate affected traffic during the construction period.
The Forsyth County School Transportation Director has no objections
if Bridge No. 100 is closed to traffic for construction.
VI. RECOMMENDED IMPROVEMENTS
Bridge No. 100 should be replaced at its present location with a pre-
cast reinforced concrete box culvert. According to a preliminary hydro-
graphic study, a double 8' x 7' precast concrete box culvert will
accommodate the flow of Blanket Creek at this point. The structure dimen-
sions may be increased or decreased as necessary to accommodate peak flows
of Blanket Creek as determined by further hydrologic studies.
The recommended improvements will include about 200 feet of improved
roadway approaches. A 22-foot pavement with 6-foot graded shoulders
should be provided on the approaches. The elevation of the new crossing
is expected to be approximately the same as the elevation of the existing
bridge. The length of the culvert should be adequate to accommodate a
22-foot pavement with 6-foot graded shoulders, the guardrail and the berm
behind the guardrail.
VII. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The project is expected to have an overall positive impact. Replace-
ment of an inadequate bridge will result in safer traffic operations.
The project is considered to be a Federal "categorical exclusion" due
to its limited scope and insignificant environmental consequences.
The bridge replacement will not
the quality of the human or natural
NCDOT standards and specifications.
have a significant adverse effect on
environment with the use of current
The project is not in conflict with any plan, existing land use, or
zoning regulation. No significant change in land use is expected to
result from construction of the project.
No adverse impact on families or communities is anticipated.
Right-of-way acquisition will be limited.
No significant adverse effect on public facilities or services is
expected. The project is not expected to adversely affect social,
economic, or religious opportunities in the area.
The project has been coordinated with the Soil Conservation Service
and is exempt from the Farmland Protection Policy Act.
5
t
This project requires compliance with Section 106 of the National
Historic Preservation Act of 1966 as amended. Section 106 requires that
if a federally-funded, licensed, or permitted project has an effect upon a
property listed in or eligible for the National Register of Historic
Places, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation be given an
opportunity to comment.
The area of potential effect of this project was delineated and
reviewed. The only building within the area of potential effect is less
than 50 years of age and is not eligible for the National Register.
Bridge No. 100 was built in 1957 and is not eligible for listing in
the National Register.
The project does not involve any Section 4(f) properties. There are
no publicly-owned parks, historic sites, recreational facilities, or
wildlife and waterfowl refuges of national, state, or local significance
in the vicinity of the project.
The subject project lies to the immediate north of Clemmons and west
of Winston-Salem, the Forsyth County Seat. An industrialized county, it
is located in the Piedmont physiographic province in north-central North
Carolina. The relief of the county is characterized as gently sloping,
with fairly broad ridges.
Anticipated plant community impacts for each alternate are summarized
below. Calculations are based on 80 feet of right-of-way.
Table 1. PLANT COMMUNITY/WETLAND IMPACTS BY ALTERNATE
ALTERNATE AREA OF IMPACTS (acres
Alternate 1 0.01
Recommended
Alternate lA 0.01
Alternate 2 0.30
Floodplain forests are home to a resurgent beaver Castor canadensis)
population. Other typical residents are raccoons (Procyon lotor), muskrat
Ondatra zibethicus), mink Mustela vison) and Virginia oposum (Didelphis
virginiana).
6

Birds sighted or heard in the area, include the robin Turdus
migratorus), cardinal (Cardinalis cardinalis), Carolina wren (Thryothorus
ludovicianus), Carolina chickadee Parus carolinensis) and American
goldfinch (Carduelis psaltria).
Wetland communities are valuable habitat for reptiles and amphibians.
Amphibians in particular, are highly water dependent for completion of
larval stages in their life cycle. Some species are totally aquatic.
Spring peeper H la crucifer), bullfrog Rana catesbeiana), pickerel frog
palustris) dwarf salamander Eur cea quadridigitata), southern dusky
salamander (Desmongnathus auriculatus), yellowbelly slider (chrysemys
scripta), northern water snake Nerodiea sipedon), and rat snake Ela he
obsoleta) are but a few of the reptiles and amphibians likely to be found
in the project area.
Fish species that are common to the study area, are carp C rinus
carpio), channel catfish (Ictalurus catus), white suckers (catostomus
commersoni), snail bullheads (Ictalurus brunneus), (I. nebulosus).
Redbreast sunfish Le omis auritus) and largemouth bass (Micropterus
salmoides) and common game fish.
Loss of-wildlife habitat, particularly for aquatic species and the
elimination of existing habitat are serious impacts that result from
dredging, filling, pile-driving operations, slope stabilization and land
clearing. These construction activities result in the direct loss of
benthic organisms and an increase in silt load in wetland environments.
Mobile aquatic organisms are better able to avoid impacts, and will have a
faster recovery rate from siltation, than those species that are filter
feeders and/or relatively immobile. The removal of benthic organisms
reduces the potential food supply for vertebrate and aquatic organisms.
Siltation has many adverse impacts on fish and benthos: decreases
the depth of light penetration inhibiting plant and algal growth, which is
a food source; clogs the filtration apparatus of filter-feeding benthos
and the gills of fish; buries benthic organisms on the bottom, cutting
them off from a food source; adversely modifies preferred benthic
substrate; and spoils downstream spawning beds for fish.
This bridge replacement project spans Blanket Creek, a first-order
tributary to the Yadkin River, contained within the Yadkin-Pee Dee River
basin.
Blanket Creek may be characterized as a sandy, low gradient stream.
The stream course is channelized and varies in width from six to twenty
feet. A large amount of debris occupies the channel.
Blanket Creek has a "best usage" classification of C. Class C
designates water suitable for secondary recreation, aquatic life
propagation and survival, fishing, wildlife and agriculture.
No waters classified as High Quality waters, Outstanding Resource
Waters, nor any segments of rivers classified under the federal Wild and
Scenic Rivers Act or the state Natural and Scenic Rivers Act, will be
impacted by the proposed project.
7

A man-dominated (shrub-scrub) community was identified in the study
area. It is characterized as a wetland.
Wetland communities were identified in the project corridor on the
basis of low soil chroma values, hydrophytic vegetation and the presence
of hydrology or hydrological indicators, such as stained, matted
vegetation, high water marks on trees, buttressed tree bases and surface
roots.
Man-dominated lands are areas where man's structures or activities
preclude natural plant succession. Maintenance activities associated with
a powerline clearing through the floodplain of Blanket Creek have
contributed to a shrub-scrub community. Sweet-gum (Liquidambar
syraciflua) and sycamore (Plantanus occidentalis) thickets are
interspersed with black willow Salix ni ra), blackberry Rubus sp.) and
swamp rose Rosa palustris). Mature black walnut trees Ju lans nigra)
are scattered throughout this community.
A rich herbaceous layer is composed of (Polygonum convolvulus),
jumpseed Tovara virginiana), wood-sorrel Oxalis violaceae), jewel-seed
(Impatiens capensis), pigweed (Chenopodium album), verbesina
alternifolia), lespedeza (Lespedeza virginica), pokeweed (Phytolaca
virginica), Japanese honeysuckle Lonicera japonica). Prevalent vines are
green-brier Smilax lauca) and moonseed (Menispermum canadense).
Embankments and culverts will modify flow patterns in portions of the
wetlands close to the road, and hence modify the original character of the
habitat. Pools frequently created above or below openings of culverts,
trap sediment during periods of high water. Wetland flood control
capacity will be reduced proportionately by the amount of fill utilized in
wetlands.
Wetlands fall under the broad category of "Waters of the United
States" as defined in 33 CFR 328.3. The US Army Corps of Engineers (COE)
takes jurisdiction over the discharge of dredged or fill material into
these wetlands as authorized by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act.
Impacts resulting from bridge replacement and the construction of a
detour would involve at least partial clearing of wetland areas. Wetland
habitat within the construction path would be eliminated where Blanket
Creek is crossed on fill and culverts. Construction of the culvert will
introduce sediment to Blanket Creek. Minimal habitat loss and the
modification of existing habitat would also be associated with culvert
placement in the channel.
Probable Wetland acreage impacts are summarized in Table 1.
In accordance with provisions of Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
(33 U.S.C. 1344), a permit will be required from the COE for the discharge
of dredged or fill material into "Waters of the United States".
The subject project is classified as a Categorical Exclusion likely
to come under Provisions of Nationwide Permit 33 CFR 330.5 (A) 23. This
permit authorized any activities, work and discharges undertaken,
8
I
assisted, authorized, regulated, funded or financed, in whole or in part,
by another federal agency and that the activity is "categorically
excluded" from environmental documentation because it is included within a
category of actions which neither individually or cumulatively have a
significant effect on the environment. However, final permit decisions
are left to the discretionary authority of the United States Army Corps of
Engineers.
A 401 Water Quality Certification administered through the N. C.
Department of Environment, Health and Natural Resources will be required.
This certificate is issued for any activity which may result in a
discharge into waters for which a federal permit is required.
Compensatory mitigation is not required under a Nationwide Permit.
Erosion and sedimentation control measures will be strictly enforced
during construction activities to minimize unnecessary impacts to
stream/wetland ecosystems.
Plants and animals with federal classifications of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T), Proposed Endangered (PE) and Proposed Threatened (PT) are
protected under provisions of Section 7 and Section 9 of the Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended.
Information received from the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
reports the federally Endangered red-cockaded woodpecker Picoides
borealis) and the small-anthered bittercress (cardimine micranthera) as
occurring in Forsyth County.
The red_cockaded woodpecker has specific nesting and foraging habitat
requirements. Nesting habitat consists of pine or pine-hardwood (50
percent or more pine) stands over 60 years of age. Available foraging
habitat is defined as pine and pine-hardwood stands (50 percent or more
pine) over 30 years of age, continguous to and within 0.5 mile of the
colony centroid. The 0.5 mile radius from the colony centroid represents
the foraging range of clans and may encompass areas outside of the project
area.
No suitable habitat exists in the project area, thus subject project
will not impact the species.
The federally Endangered small-anthered bittercress is endemic to
seepages, streambanks and moist woods in Forsyth and Stokes Counties. A
member of the mustard family, it is an erect, slender herb with a simple
or branched stem growing 2 to 4 decimeters tall. Crenate, basal leaves
are 1 to 2 cm long. Stem leaves are alternate and unlobed. Flowers are
small and have four white petals, six stamens and small, round anthers.
Fruits are slender siliques. Flowers and fruits appear in April and May.
Suitable habitat exists along the stream bank of Blanket Creek,
highlighting the possibility that the plant may be present. Due to
seaonsality and the need for reproductive structures for positive
identification, a scientific survey will be conducted in April/May, during
the flowering and fruiting period of this plant.
9
It
In addition, the Candidate species nestronia (Nestronia umbellula)
and bog turtle Clemm s muhlenbergi) may occur in the area. Candidate
species are not legally protected under the Endangered Species Act and are
not subject to any of its provisions, including Section 7, until they are
formally proposed or listed as Threatened or Endangered.
The bog turtle is currently listed as a federal Candidate species.
It is listed by the state of North Carolina as "threatened. It occurs in
bogs, wet pastures and wet thickets. Suitable habitat exists in the
project area although no surveys for the organism were conducted. The
presence or absence of this species will be confirmed through a scientific
survey during the appropriate season(s).
The USF14S provided information on the Candidate (C) species
nestronia. Nestronia is listed by the state of North Carolina as
Threatened. It occurs in sandy, open woodlands and creek borders. It is
usually parasitic on oak and pine roots. The presence or absence of this
species can only be confirmed through a scientific survey during the
appropriate season(s).
Plants or animals with state designations of Endangered (E),
Threatened (T) or Special Concern (SC) are granted protection by the State
Endangered Species Act and the NC Plant Protection and Conservation Act of
1979, administered and enforced by the North Carolina Wildlife Resources
Commission and the NC Department of Agriculture.
The North Carolina Natural Heritage Program database reports no state
protected species within the immediate project area.
The project is located within the Northern Piedmont Air Quality
Control Region. The ambient air quality for Forsyth County has been
determined to be in compliance with the National Ambient Air Quality
Standards. Since this project is located in an area where the State
Implementation Plan (SIP) does not contain any transportation control
measures, the conformity procedures of 23 CFR 770 do not apply to this
project.
The project will not substantially increase traffic volumes.
Therefore, its impact on noise levels and air quality will be insig-
nificant. Noise levels could increase during construction but will be
temporary. If vegetation is disposed of by burning, all burning shall be
done in accordance with applicable local laws and regulations of the North
Carolina SIP for air quality in compliance with 15 NCAC 2D.0520. This
evaluation completes the assessment requirements of FHPM 7-7-3 (highway
traffic noise) and FHPM 7-7-9 (air quality) and io additional reports are
required.
Forsyth County is a participant in the Na--.ional Flood Insurance
Regular Program. The approximate 100-year floodplain in the project area
is shown in Figure 4. The amount of floodplain area to be affected is not
considered to be significant.
10
t,
There are no practical alternatives to crossing the floodplain area.
Any shift in alignment would result in a crossing of about the same
magnitude. The alignment of the project is perpendicular to the flood-
plain area. All reasonable measures will be taken to minimize any
possible harm.
An individual permit will not be required from the Corps of Engineers
since the Nationwide Section 404 permit provisions are applicable, and the
provisions of 330.5(b) and 330.6 will be followed.
On the basis of the above discussion, it is concluded that no serious
adverse environmental effects will result from implementation of the
project.
MJ/wP

4
h
accovdle 1 1
Rul I
n 5
?Stan?
67 Bethania 65
3'+ F 0
?1J^'Ylenn, Pfafftw 7 S
31 Lewisville j1•
e 3
Eton-Salem'

3867
_ 0.. _ 1666 -'VJ 3/1
j
ov o __ 7e?i
]D 1 ), 17 '
7e4 ne
a
o a6 ? ne .,x 7E67
36V 0$ 15 v II7s90 07
o
1196 .37 3697 6u ]661
739] 3?el
369, O9 .16 m 09
v 7088
]?9 -o )699
I IICI I ' ' (a
1.100 _ j u66
Capernium x6
I tea. '" 5 1I
.0rF- 0
I
1107 I ?
,1991 _
liol 7e?s c ,
7 BRIDGE NO. 100/ _ 3616 1161 1
3678
07 ???-? ilCV 55
J65, 17 -
t
19 •15 3607 .09
,•y - ?F a d
7 1
ee 3677 76]] _ ?.
09 ,0 - I t367e / 1. .15
363 ' Eel O 07 3637 `
j e 09 0
? Ie6
1 / 7676 07679 j
06
6l Jam, 07 ye r
-3673 ? 761]
J6]A 1101 60 110`
LEGEND
STUDIED DETOUR ROUTE
NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION '
DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS
PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL
BRANCH
FORSYTH COUNTY
BRIDGE NO. 100 ON SR 1101
OVER BLANKET CREEK
B-2035
0 feet 100
2/91 1 1 FIG. 1
5 1
town q
H

PHOTOS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS
' BRIDGE NO. 100
FORSYTH COUNTY
B-2035
LOOKING
LOOKING
-s
?.!:?1 y•

''? SIDE VIEW
FIGURE 3
! , 1 L + ? ? 1 ? ;, CIS ?'??, ?'>,?I ??? )-- % ?? t ?Hai'mon?• rove
?)? -\. I\1?1/ (? r, .?, ?? i }\`???? f! ,I!????? :• Rio~?( irk i ??_.. /A (?Pi? - ) I! 1? ???r
-i Qp Ilk
//lob-??? ?.I ??i ?? ?f %/?/• r _?'\\??o ??? ?/ -????h% % \?• 1 ?! V` !? .? ??• j
t
?.1 igh Sel?
X )0Y
wat
Weel r r8yLuj11 _
, J
l
X41.1 ? ?, -ii •'? 100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
°f ? ?' ? ?,? l? (l O<I BRIDGE NO. 100 ?)?
l,.%.";?„ , (r?? - ?? z?• -?1r::? >>> %, i?
;? r? ?? ,?? ? \ 1 .--?') .? W?rnlr( , '. ,?r ?! ( r ,7 /id - •?? i / ii-" Y' ?1
-C ipernium
786
?li????\r ?? ? I•l? ? ? G?i ?,y., r, ? ? ,? ?? / ?1?'?? ? ?` ? - ??t ? (?O ebo lr•/ I? 1 .),? ?? ??: i,
??';1! ?I??- ?\,_ ??? ° ?. i??/ - ? //1% ,l %i a ?)? ?l 1?_ ?1`??\ ?.r ??..^? /.-'-? L? +I ?F!\^?o?f%I ./1 1r?r j?% III ? ?C?''?'lt? ?`' 4? 1? l?l ?) )/%?(Il!JlL''li// (f?
1 0 1 % (r/r/ ??; o luro??`r?
•?? ??A? - ? ? 11 /fl? I l ????/ ?? ???)- ???? ? Jt ??/? ??.! a ?l ?f !:?? , i? ? _?!? ?A? ? L,??11?
\. %/ •? I +? 1 /?--"1 ?-' ?I 774 (?,If"?c ?'O?I .? \?\f \` _/ ?\???J D\ \/ i???/?••?
?• a r f 1 7` _
?? ?? ?: ( u_fi, -? _ ?I&•?/ ?(' %% p?' ?? _? ?r(I ????• ? ...•••111 ?1???(i?
//,' S P I! )? 1100 YEAR FLOOD PLAIN
I % ; ( JJ
"1 1 1 II _ v `,?I, j
Unio O
n Hi ? ?
it ?r ???, .,?' ,A? •f i-?; ,, ',. ??i, t v?;ji r---
il} i ? .lr? Al ? ? !1' ?. •I? RY ( ? 'f ( \(t r II
', `? ? l?l ?, /''i? • l ? / /' • I'? > ?`li) , _ j x) 74
l
V ('.<??? Laq,t
A I?? s
?M
FIGUH 01,
"AL