115689

SIXTH WATER BRIDGE UTAH COUNTY, UTAH COUNTY UTAH STATE HISTORY 111111111111111111111111111 1111 111111111111111111111111111111111 3 9222 00575 6593 HISTORIC SITE FORM ( I O-9 1) UTAH OFFICE OF PRESERVATION I IDENTlflCnlON Name of Property: Sixth Water Bridge Address: The Sixth Water Bridge is located on the Ray's Valley Road (Forest Road #051), about 16 .7 miles from Spanish Fork Canyo n (Highway 6), and 1.5 miles from the junction with FR #029 (the Dip Vat/West Portal Road). See Maps I and 2. County: Utah Current Owner Name: Uinta National Forest Currel1l Owner Address: 88 West 100 North Provo , Utah Forest Service Number: UN-373 USGS I'vlap Name & Date: Two Tom Hill , Utah USGS Quad (1993 series) SE Y. of the NW Y. of the NE I!. of Twnshp: 8 S. Range. 6 E., Section: 6 UTM. Zone 12, 474430 m E 4444350 m N Y. of an acre 2 STATLS/ LSE Proper tv Categorv _ bui/ding(s) X structure site _ object Evaluation X eligiblelcontributing _ ineligible/non-col1lributing _ out-ol-period Use Original Use: Transportation Current Use: Transportation 3 DOCL\1ENTAflON ..... .... ................. ....................... ........... . -- Photos: Dates slid!!s: ~ prints' 1974 , 1988, 1997 historic: Drawings and Plans .K... measuredjloor plans _ site sketch map _ Historic American Bldg. Survey .K... original plans available at: Uinta National Forest Research Sources (check all sources consulted, whether useful or not) _ abstract of title _ citylcounty histories _ tax card & photo _ personal interview _ building permit _ USHS Library s _ sewer permit USHS Preservation Files _ Sanborn JI.t/aps USHS Architects File _ obilllary index _ LDS Family History Library _ city directories/gazetteers _ local library: census records _ university library: _ biographical encyclopedias _ newspapers K-other: Uinta National Forest road and bridge files Bibliographical References (books, articles, interviews, etc.) Attach copies of all research notes, title searches, obituaries, and so forth. Isbell, Victor K. Historical Development of the Spanish Fork Ranger District. Uinta National Forest. 1972. MerrilL David and Donald L. Snyder and Jay Anderson An Historical Mitigation Study of the Strawberry Valley Project, Utah. Mesa Corporation, Orem, Utah. On file, Uinta National Forest. 1982 United States Department of Agriculture Identifying and Preserving Historic Bridges. Engineering Technology and Development Series. Washington DC: Forest Service Engineering Staff. 2000 Researcher/Organization: Raena Ballantyne and Charmaine Thompson, Uinta National Forest Date: 06/04/0 I 4 ARCHITECTURAL DESCRIPTION .. .... ................... _.... ..-...... Building Style/ Type: Bridge: Transverse Deck and Stringer Superstructure, and Treated Lumber Substructure No. Stories: I Foundation Material: Wood Wall Material(s):_W:..:...:::o.::::.o..=d_ _ _ _ _ _ _.Additions: X none (describe below) l Alterations: minor _ major none _ minor _ major (describe below) Number of associated all/buildings _0_ and/or structures __ . Briefly describe the principal building, additions or alterations and their dates, and associated outbuildings and structures. Use continuation sheets as necessary. The plans for the Sixth Water Bridge (attached) were drawn up in 1951. Like all bridges during this era, it was built using standard Region 4 of the Forest Service bridge plans. The bridge is made primarily of wood. Its deck is constructed using the Transverse Deck and Stringer style. It spans 36 feet from bank to bank, and its deck is 12 ' 7" in width from inner curb to inner curb. The distance between the outer edges of the curb is 14 ' . The curbs have been made with 2" x 8" laminated boards. The bottom deck supports rest about 10 feet above the stream level. The bridge's deck was constructed using 8" x 20 " x 36 ' stringers and 1' 1/2" wide planks, with 2" x 6" cross-bridging, and secured using 20 pennyweight nails. The deck ends were secured using 4 " x 10" solid bridging and l;" " x 30" drift pins. The deck of the bridge was surfaced using laminated 2 " x 4 " planks . However, these have long since been thickly covered over by dirt. At each comer of the bridge were 8" x 8" posts. installed at the original construction of the bridge. These posts were originally painted white and had reflectors mounted on them . They were replaced sometime prior to 1975 with metal posts and a tubular gate. The substructure (abutments and wing walls) style is generally known as Treated Lumber. The 13 ' wide abutments consist of 12" x 12" x 10' posts on 4' 4" inch centers that hold in place a "backing" of 3" x 8" x 13' planks set on their edges, one atop the other and secured with Ye" x 7" bolts with plain washers. The bridge ' s wing walls are 12 ' wide each, and similarly constructed using 3" x 12" backing planks. Forest records indicate that the bridge was constructed some time in 1952, and has remained fairly unaltered since then , although the bridge has undergone some deterioration and structural decay. Duringa 1997 engineering assessment, the bridge's capacity for water, vehicular loads, etc. was evaluated. Six to 8 inches of mud and silt had accumulated on the bridge ' s deck, causing under-deck seepage. A scour hole under the southeast footing had by this time affected at least half of the width of the footing. Water stains had affected the substructure of the bridge, particularly on its southeast comer. It was also noted that several of the stringers were discolored and beginning to split. Vegetation and debris buildup was also noted around the structure. Since the 1997 assessment, it has been proposed that the bridge be replaced with a safer, more modem bridge which will have the capacity to support heavier water and traffic loads. Despite its slightly deteriorating condition, the bridge still possesses sufficient integrity to potentially be Eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Although the bridge is curently slightly out of period, it will become 50 years old in 2002. :; HISTORY ...................... ... . , __ Architect/Builder: US Forest Service Date of Construction: 1952 Historic Themes: Mark themes related to this property with "S" or "C" (S = significant, C = contributing). (see instructions for details) Economics _ Industry ~ Agriculture Politics/ Architecture Education Invention Government _ Landscape _ Archaeology _ Engineering _ Religion Art Entertainment/ Architecture Science Commerce Recreation Law _ Social History Communications _ Ethnic Heritage Literature ~ Transportation _ Community Planning _ Exploration/ _ Maritime History Other & Development Settlement Military C Conservation Health/Medicine _ Performing Arts Write a chronological history of the property, focusing primarily on the original or principal owners & significant events. Explain andjustify any significant themes marked above. Use continuation sheets as necessary. A .L. Anderson, Regional Engineer, approved the Sixth Water Bridge in 1951. It is typical of the all-wood bridges that were built by the Forest Service in the 1950's through the 1970's, using standard regional plans . After the abundant labor of the Civilian Conservation Corps disappeared in 1942, the agency was forced to abandon coursed stone as its preferred bridge substructure material , and began using either treated lumber or concrete instead. In Region 4 of the Forest Service, most bridges from the 1950's were built either of treated lumber of thi s style , or of nail-lam style (such as the Right Fork of White River Bridge; USDA 2000). This particular bridge style was used on the Uinta National Forest from 1952 to 1985 . The Sixth Water Bridge was the first of its kind built on the Forest, but was rapidly followed by others, including the Monk 's Hollow Bridge (middle part of Diamond Fork) in 1953-54 ; Sterling Ranch Bridge (lower Diamond Fork) in 1956-57; Diamond Fork Campground Bridge (lower Diamond Fork) in 1962-63 ; Deer Creek Bridge (Provo Canyon) in 1963 ; Twin Bridge # 2 (Payson Canyo n) in 1979 ; and Twin Bridge # I (Payson Canyon) in 1985. The Sixth Water Bridge's primary historic value is in the role it played in improved transportation and range management in this part of the Uinta National Forest. The first road into this area existed by 1901, as July 14 and 15 1902 G .L.O maps in upper Diamond Fork show a road all the way to the Strawberry Ridge . However, this "road" was rudimentary at best. Access into the area grew considerably when a new and much improved road was completed in 1906, which connected Spanish Fork Canyon with the newl y proposed West Portal Tunnel site. It was built by the Strawberry Water User's Association , in preparation for the Strawberry Water Project (Merrill et aI. , 1982:48). This new road through upper Diamond Fork was essential for the development of the Strawberry Water Project. It was the supply conduit for construction equipment and materials, as well as the little town (Camp Clarke) that housed the tunnel construction workers (Merrill et aI. , 1982). The modem road up Diamond Fork generally follows this construction road right of way, as does Forest Road 029 , which connects the main Diamond Fork road with the West Portal and the Strawberry Ridge (see Map I). About 1.2 miles of the lowest part of Forest Road 029 (which is in the upper half of Section 1 and the northwest comer of Section 6 on Map 2) is part of the Ray's Valley Road Reconstruction project, and the proposed action involves closing this segment in favor of a new segment of road on the slope above (see Map 2). This segment is part of the original West Portal Road corridor. The original 1906 West Portal Road was absorbed by the existing Diamond Fork road, as well as the road that runs up the canyon slope up to the West Portal (now called Forest Road 029). As such, the majority of the original road has been completely rebuilt through the years, and does not have sufficient integrity to be considered a historic property in and of itself. Construction of the Diamond Fork road up to the West Portal certainly opened the upper part of the Diamond Fork watershed to other types of activity as well. Many of its side roads were built to meet the needs of specific uses . For example, the road up Sawmill Hollow , across the canyon from this project area (see Map I) was created to access a logging operation. The road from the West Portal Road on up to Ray's Valley -- the road containing the Sixth Water Bridge -- was created to meet the needs of stockmen . Livestock grazing has always been one of the most important economic activities in the greater Diamond Fork Watershed (Isbell 1972), and this is particularly the case in the area of Upper Diamond Fork and Ray's Valley (see Map I). The upper parts of the Diamond Fork watershed, including Ray's Valley, were so badly overgrazed by 1900 that " .. .the number of sheep herds could be counted by the dust clouds they raised" (Isbell 1972:62). By 1906 a good road, by the standards of the time, existed into upper Diamond Fork. In addition, a 1907 U.S.G.S map of the Strawberry Valley shows a road up into Ray's Valley from Sheep Creek (and Spanish Fork Canyon), as far as Third Water (see Map I). However, this map does not even indicated a trail connecting these two areas . By 1920, a Uinta National Forest map shows a trail connecting Diamond Fork and Ray's Valley at Third Water. The 1920 "trail" (also called "road" in some places) was built by "stockmen", and all maintenance work was considered the responsibility of the Spanish Fork Livestock Association (Uinta National Forest 7720 Development Roads File for the Ray's Valley Road). This might help explain why a transportation corridor on National Forest System lands that appears to so logically connect two active grazing areas remained in such poor condition for so long. Nonetheless, the corridor seems to have been sufficiently important to the Association that they did invest in rudimentary maintenance of the "trail/road." The Forest Service finally began to improve the "road" in 1947, by investing $2 ,000 in road surface repairs . What might explain this change in Forest Service attitudes toward this feature? Ever since this area had come under Forest Service management in 1905 , the agency had worked with the Spanish Fork Livestock Association to improve the existing range conditions, and steady progress had been made through a combination of stock reductions, elimination of common use (having both cattle and sheep on the same lands), and reductions in the season of use . However, some areas had been slow to improve, including Ray's Valley (Map I). When considerable range rehabilitation money became available in 1947, the Forest Service began construction of a ten-mile long fence around Ray's Valley, and by 1949 had reseeded 2,300 acres of ground within that fence. Smaller patches of ground in the area were also reseeded in 1949, such that the Spanish Fork Livestock Association took non-use (kept livestock off some areas) for three years in order to allow the reseeded areas to mature (Isbell 1972:66). It was a shared effort by both the Association and Forest Service that was considered a true range rehabilitation success. It was in the midst of this massive rehabilitation effort th at the Forest Service took over responsibility for the management of the Ray's Valley Road. The resurfacing money spent in 1947 was followed by an official declaration of management of the road by the Forest Service in 1949. It is unclear from the 7720 Development Road file if this change in management was necessitated by the road access needs of the reseeding project, or if it was a byproduct of a new system ofrange management. Perhaps it was both . Either way, by 1949 they had spend another $5 ,000 in road improvements, and the old "trail" was portrayed as a true road on a 1954 Uinta National Forest Map . Construction of the Sixth Water Bridge appears to have been the final feature of this etTort to upgrade the Ray's Valley Road. It was designed in 1951 , and built in 1952. It does not appear to replace an earlier bridge, since the 1920 era "trail" shown on the old maps appears to have crossed Sixth Water Creek at either a ford or a small bridge about one 1/8 to 114 of a mile down stream . Sixth Water is the channel through which all of the Strawberry water from the West Portal Tunnel flows . As such , it has high flows for most of the spring and summer season. The new bridge would have been an essential feature on a road expected to reliably carry vehicle traffic . In summary, the Ray's Valley Road improvements appear to have been an important component in the 1947-1951 range improvement efforts undertaken in this area collectively by the Uinta National Forest and Spanish Fork Livestock Association. These efforts were one of the first large-scale range rehabilitation programs undertaken on the Forest during the post-CCC era, and were an example for larger watershed rehabilitation efforts in Northern Utah in the 1950's and 1960's. The Sixth Water Bridge was an essential part of that road rehabilitation , as it allowed vehicles to pass over the high flows of Sixth Water, and therefore connected Diamond Fork itself with Ray's Valley in a way that had not been possible before. Therefore, we consider the bridge to be Eligible for the National Register under Criterion A, for its association with the locally important event of the Ray's Valley Rehabilitation , and the broader local theme of improved livestock management in the Diamond Fork area. 1- ~ 1_~~2_~~;t::~~1~~====~ =. FS3 HF3 1 FS3 E3 E3 CONTOUR INT '=' ERVAL 40 FEET e--3 DATUM ISME ~ .' AN SEA LEVEL . " J .. /'( ~t',r.?f 7~ Sf ~ ~ Wttt-W 'BVl\~e- /IIol"l-i. AblAl-,.,,.,,1 f' Oalr fh,J1f"'/"" 74 5 i }(TI+- W A~I< 11 - "2~-8e • ~ . , S lY-Ttt (I - W ATER- -.:l--:L -8 8 5(x Tif W~TE1211-2.."'2. -13& U . S . D . A. FOREST SERVICE, BRIDGE REGION INSPECTION 06 )' Notes By R. (I . S'_,. ,to{ Date ! ~r 1'?9~ Check By _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Date _ _ __ 4 NOTES Date 10 5",-# 1 Name .5/xrtf W 47E,f Bridge No. 700 ~/ - (J(),; Road Name ((''(.I V#/!"y c CJo'/ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __ Ref. 7718.41 ._. I I I ,PPIf"O-1 k H I I 11 I I I I I ELEMENT I'iAME I I RATING COMMENT t.ock,)'J I Poor fJDor I 4,..:'.J'.j'N!bnt J-ddJr-;'n,t t:; Jt!~j , (.,,1 tir e / N>verl f , : <,., f,l~ ~ P~t;t7~ _..fl-~./ tlt',...f- s)o.. iler::r ,-n: r~~'I ! I A'f ~ ~/'i1/er l . I , I I" '1.( . 0 'I I I I Sheet _ _ of _ _ Inspection By R. f . S"" ' /~ Reviewed By_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--'-_ _ _ _ __ I ELEMENT NUMBER If7r Weather {'/o",d'y I h ol- 7700 : I r I I ! I '1 ' -[ I I I I I I I I I 1 Iii I I ' I i ~ I : !.I .: ~ "Ii' I I til :J::,~i' ! ;::;:z=c============;======';::=======±ifV I 'I I ,'(,,, "~ I i ~"' ;v" I .~ i . I l'lIte.k v' ; 1;2 '- '1 '/ . I I " o,~ ~::'.~ : I I ; ~ !1~~I~t____--____-__~___________~1 , : ' ' I ' ! ~1el" / ( orl; e! "~ ric ! ~/rG. /rto;e, e N,!,,/ .. 1 !.fO~~ &V'''./w tt /1 I AI .. ,nm eni tJ "fir", ~ /-.'o/lf ' kr------~!O "-------------------~M Fe< ,'r A ~ .. ".f ...,,' IIs ~'.r ~'" !IJtrfJ e,..,f. 'Vl-J I ~& " 1''''.( t- ,'t I I i t -- I i ,, t_';'" .- - I /0 / .- I I ,, ,I =- R4-7700-19 I (7/72) 1 /4 - 0" '4 '.18" Mach. <?"" ,..,,. ~ ~c " L" . ~ w.~ F" f- . ~ C y'!'"~ ~o" ", 34,"" t: ~. ~ , ' " ~ Dr,.!1 P;ns , yz ~a,,-,I-~i!!::..r_ _ __ " I _0/1 ".,., I ~ ~ IZ'" 1'2 ")(11.' S; II W .shtZ"-:' st ~ .......,., W-I -S) I.T ~ \ F,' I I b!"c;:' ~pJ I r--ri ~ .1 I 41.4 /1 I l I ~ ~ ~, r+--I • r- H- ~~,~ ~ }~~ If r&.~~~:~~~-::,s ~ ~ LONGITUDINAL SECTiON Sc"/c : ~ " o /lO' ~ ~ ~~ . ::x ,x ~ .~ cf I " I ~ , ., '" 41.4" "1 I ~ I I 4~4" j,.a ' t--r- ~ # ~ ..>< PI. r--r $)/r...t- I W- 7/1 MAch. 80 If ~~~~~ ~ ~ • I >l v ." ....,,. /.3 '~ g'",;':o Ilu el"c!: \ lbaj <uun 5 ;/1 &: bAc.k;n3 ~ II y; ~ I'f) ~II .p ; n.5 ~ v·o: ;5,- /1 12 "'</2")( 1ft, I ~ C RosS :314")( IG" [OJ ScrttLJ Mal. WasA .. ,.. .'i';.. ~ ll~:"'r){ 1c.' ~ %.'\I~· 8oJ+ C'I's'K HtZ4j ~ ~~ l~ , r ~ '. ~R~ ~ ~ .l...,. ® 24-" Dn'f/ Pi ,s,-7 -Z- }..- , ____+-___ -----..L:!-I'.3h '" ' . :.. ,.,. C:-:-c- . t+ ~ ...~ LA' aniJrdlvcl w~ar;."3 sor(;ce. ")i 4 'j;;;;in4f~d Drzck.. f/'. 'n<liI6 F= U){B"" .3~G" Pos';' ~~(8PaintWhite I~ ~ VII' 1.1. 1. W""" )4" StZ /~c.ftZj sand ( 8"1. c (I ill ~ @ I • r+-- i 5 EC T ION Scalt : ~': l~o 7 8 - 8 "xZO ")( 3~ ' S !r /n.JiZrs :I ",<8"",3' ) _ __ Sf,., p j '/z '" 7" 801 +S ' r-"7T~// Bac.kt"3 P I. VVa51.Il.rS f 'I It) Po"n I rod w,-Ih .J Lead. coat~ Of r~d l"-x IZ 'Rod- o.G. }1/a~ers '2 nul:5 €ach q:nd. , I "I:IJ " IX) I@ p-----~ If): '., • 10".00" s /I I r===~'~F=======~ II 8""'8"x 2 !lo " /3 loc.i:'.s 3"" tJ ")t IlO" Fill /O~/o'5//1 .seCTIDN OF WING, ELEVAi lOH OF= WIN €, 5<:,,/. : ~':I~o" PLAN ¥,, './LO· ~c.lc : LJ. ~. Ol!p;4erM~Nr OF AfirlCUL TUIU!- FOIZEST ~l!ev/ce=:. TOTAL QUANIIII~S Unfrt:arcd r,'mOtr Trrzat-ea Timbe,- HarriwDre 7S 14~475 / ZZ I UI;YT,&/ NATIONAL FOeeSr OES/6NI!O ~ofZ H ZO LOADIN6 OIl5/6Nf!I1 : it. II. O. ~JIILE: A. $;;~fIoI-I'{-- AP"'.II'D: ,::?", 6,_ DeI't~: H #.0. CNIlCaD : T.L.,Io(. I),..,,: J/-u-=!!. DRAFT MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UINT A NATIONAL FOREST AND THE UTAH STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE PURSUANT TO 36 CFR 800.6(a) WHEREAS, the Uinta National Forest (UNF) has determined that the Ray's Valley Road Project will have an effect upon the Sixth Water Bridge, eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places, and has consulted with the Utah State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) pursuant to 36 CFR 800, regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f); and NOW THEREFORE, the UNF and the Utah SHPO agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. STIPULATIONS The UNF will ensure that the following measures are carried out: 1. INTENSIVE LEVEL SURVEY FORM (ILS): An ILS form must be completed to basic survey standards (see Utah SHPO instructions). Basic standards require only limited historic research. 2. PHOTOGRAPHS : Photographs are required of all features of the bridge. An adequate number of professional quality black/white 35 millimeter photographs (3x5 prints with accompanying negatives) to show all exterior elevations (where possible to obtain all elevations), landscape photographs, detailed photographs of all areas to be impacted by the adverse effect, photographs of all architectural details shall be submitted. Photographs shall be numbered and labeled with location and date photograph was taken and keyed to a site plan. All prints and negatives shall be submitted in archivally stable protective storage pages. 3. ORA WINGS: Sketch plans of the bridge and its immediate surroundings shall be submitted. The plans must be based on an accurate footprint (measurements taken on site) and show all existing construction. These measured drawings are to be on 8.5" x 11" or 11" x 17" sheets. 4. INTERPRETATION: Curriculum shall be prepared for the Diamond Fork Youth Forest that teaches about the effect that roads and bridges (including the Sixth Water Bridge) have had on the history and existing ecology of the greater Diamond Fork Watershed. This curriculum will become part of the package of material that teachers use with their students, both in the classroom and while in Diamond Fork itself. 5. REPOSITORY: All materials shall be submitted to the Division of State History, Historic Preservation Office, to be placed on file . Execution of the Memorandum of Agreement by the UNF and the Utah SHPO, its transmittal to the Advisory Council, and implementation of its terms, evidences that the UNF has afforded the Council an opportunity to comment on the Ray ' s Valley Road Project and its effect on historic properties, and that the UNF has taken into account the effects of the undertaking on historic properties. UINTA NATIONAL FOREST Date : - - - - - - By : WILLIAM OTT, District Ranger UTAH STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER Date: - - - - - - - By: MAX EVANS , State Historic Preservation Officer COVER PAGE Must Accompany All Project Reports Submitted to Utah SHPO Project Name: Ray's Valley Road Realignment Report Date: 9/24/200 I Principal Investigator: Acreage Surveyed Intensive: U-00-FS-0080f County(ies): __U=ta::ch'----_ _ __ Charmaine Thompson 420 acres 7.5' Series USGS Map Reference(s): Sites Reported State Project: ReconiIntuitive: acres Ray's Valley and Two Tom Hill, Utah None Count Archaeological Sites Revisits (no inventory form update) o Revisits (updated IMACS site inventory form attached) o New Recordings (lMACS site inventory form attached) o Total Count of Archaeological Sites o Historic Structures (USHS 106 site info form attached) nla Smithsonian Site Numbers Sixth Water Bridge Total National Register Eligible Sites Checklist of Required Items I. ~ 1 Copy of the Final Report, 2. ~ Copy of7.5 ' Series USGS Map With SurveyedlExcavated Areas Clearly Identified. 3. _ _ _ _ 4. Completed IMACS Site Inventory Forms, Including Parts A and B or C, the IMACS Encoding Form, Site Sketch Map, Photographs, and Copy of the Appropriate 7.5' Series USGS Map withe Site Location Clearly Marked and Labelled withe Smithsonian Site Number ~ Completed "Cover Sheet" Accompanying Final Report and Survey Materials. FSM 2360 CULTURAL RESOURCE SUMMARY REPORT FORM USDA-Forest Service - Intermountain Region 2.1 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-00-FS-0080f) 1. 1 UN-00-315 Report Number 3. I 5. I Report Name R. Ballantyne and C Thompson Author 9/24/2001 mo. day M 15. 16. 17. District I Twnshp 5E 6E 9·1 Utah Range 12. Investigation type 13. Project Function 14. Project Costs Sections 18. 19. Field Admin . County #2 11. Quad Map(s) : Ray's Valley and Two Tom Hill, Utah USGS Quads Dill Acres LillTrave, 23. USFS Site # UN-373 County #1 1&2 6,7& 8 Hours I 7·1 Spanish Fork State #2 8S 8S 28 70 Institution Forest State #1 1 1 4. l'--U_i_nt_a_N_at_io_n_a_I_F_o_r_es_t_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _--' 6.1 Uinta yr. 8. 1 Utah 10. I 180 24. State Site # Sixth Water Bridge 20. 21 . 22. Project Impact 25. I Eligible 26. 27. Intensive Complete Roads and Watershed $3,315 '---------' 28. II Adversell Historij I New I Nat!. Reg. Effect I I I Project Effect Relation to Project To be replaced by project Old/ Historic/ Prehistoric New Site Proposed Action The Spanish Fork Ranger District of the Uinta National Forest proposes to realign the Ray's Valley Road (Forest Road #051; see Map 1). The primary purpose of this project is to eliminate a heavily used and runoff-prone road from a sensitive riparian area that is also home to Boneville Cutthroat trout, while still providing public access through the area. Its secondary purpose is to improve the overall safety of the road by reconstructing it with a gravelled road base and making it wider. The current clayey-soil road becomes dangerous to impassible when wet, and is deeply rutted when dry. It will be changed from a single-lane to a lane and a half, to provide for safer passage. The preferred alternative proposed that the road be moved from the riparian area in which it rests to the slopes above. The project also involves the old Sixth Water Bridge, which is a single lane milled wood bridge on the current road alignment (see Map 2). It was built in 1952, has exceeded the expected life of a bridge of its style, and is beginning to see undercutting and scouring of its abutments and wing walls by the stream. The bridge is in the only R4-2300-3 (4/83) (U-OO-FS-0081 f; UN-OO-315) Ray's Valley Road Realignment Date: 9/24/2001 Map 1 Map: Uinta National Forest Travel Map General Project Area (reduced 85%) 1i:::::::J~E · 0i:::::=::;==:==i==i==:===i=::::i5 K ll o m f"l ers =i page 2 = -S~~~~~~~~~~~d.1 =---3~~,000 ~=~ "'=9 ~ ~ ~ 4000 'ed 5000 I I KllOMEUII (' 1 '- ERVAl40FEH CONTOUR INTEAN SEA LEVEL DATUM ISM I I Miner-al -Sp-rlng -, , - - > -' I' -- FSM 2360 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-FS-O080f; UN-00-31S) page 4 of9 location along this stretch of Sixth Water where the stream can be successfully spanned. As a result of all these factors, the project does not proposed to reconstruct or improve this bridge, but rather to replace it with a wider concrete bridge. After the new section of road is completed, the old portion of the road adjacent to the riparian area will undergo extensive rehabilitation. This will eliminate any chances for continued sediment runoff from the existing roadbed into Sixth Water. In addition to the new road construction, it will be necessary to improve a connecting road (Forest Road 387 on Map 1 and "Jeep Trail" on Map 2) as it passes over the Sixth Water Ridge. This will connect the new Ray's Valley Road with the existing Forest Road 029 that accesses the West Portal of the Strawberry Tunnel (see Maps 1 and 2). This road improvement will bring the two-track connecting road up to a similar level of improvement as the new Ray's Valley Road and existing Forest Road 029. Area of Potential Effect and Survey Methodology The Area of Potential Effect (APE) has been defined as any area which will be directly or indirectly impacted in any way by the project. Direct Project Effects include areas which will be physically disturbed by road construction and bridge removal , or by rehabilitation and revegetation work. These areas include the proposed new road alignment, the existing road alignment, and the existing segment of Forest Road 387 on Sixth Water Ridge. Indirect Project Effects might occur in areas which receive increased access as a result of road construction. Since the new road alignment is mostly on a steep slope, there is little chance of indirect effects along it. So, the primary area where indirect effects might occur is along thE? Sixth Water Ridge, off Forest Road 387. Heritage resource surveys were conducted in the project areas in 2000 and 2001. During the summer of 2000, the both the proposed new alignment of Ray's Valley Road as well as the existing road corridor were intensively surveyed for cultural resources by walking the road corridors in 30 meter transects. Areas adjacent to the road corridor that posessed a relatively high likelihood of containing sites were also surveyed (see Map 2). During the summer of 2001, the connecting road corridor (Forest Road 387) was surveyed by walking in 20 meter or less transects (see Map 2). The rest of this ridgetop was also surveyed in the same way, as any sites in that area might be subject to increased visitation. Survey Results No archaeological sites of any kind were found within or adjacent to any of the existing or proposed road corridors. This is probably due to the fact that most of the project area is very steep and located on erosion-prone sediments. R4-2300-3 (4/83) FSM 2360 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-F5-0080f; UN-00-315) page 5019 The Sixth Water Bridge (UN-373), built in 1952, is the only historic site in the project area, and it was recorded using a Intensive Level Historic Site Form (attached) . The bridge's condition has been monitored regularly for safety in the past three decades. While the bridge is in relatively good condition, some signs of deterioration have been detected on the abutments and deck, and these are beginning to erode the structure's overall safety rating. This is one of the reasons that keeping this bridge as part of the road's reconstruction is not considered a viable alternative. The other reason is that it is only one lane wide, and the new road will be wide enough to accomodate two-way traffic, and at relatively high speeds. Therefore, a single lane bridge is considered a safety hazard. Despite its slightly deteriorating condition, the bridge still possesses sufficient integrity to potentially be Eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. Although the bridge is still slightly out of period, the bridge will not be replaced until at least 2002, at which time it will be 50 years old. The superstructure (deck) of this bridge is of the Transverse Deck and Stringer Style, with treated lumber stringers and a deck of nail-laminated 2 x 4's. The substructure (abutments and wing walls) style is generally known as Treated Lumber, and consists of 8 x 8 inch posts on 4 foot four inch centers that hold in place a "backing" of 3 x 12 inch planks set on their edges, one atop the other. The Sixth Water Bridge, like all bridges during this era, was built using standard Region 4 of the Forest Service bridge plans. It is typical of the all-wood bridges that were built by the Forest Service in the 1950's through the 1970's. After the abundant labor of the Civilian Conservation Corps disappeared in 1942, the agency was forced to abandon coarsed stone as its preferred bridge substructure material, and began using either treated lumber or concrete instead. In Region 4 of the Forest Service, most bridges from the 1950's were built either of treated lumber of this style, or of nail-lam style (such as the Right Fork of White River Bridge; USDA 2000). The Sixth Water Bridge is one of seven bridges of this style that were built on the Uinta National Forest. Table 1 summarizes the bridges, including their locations, construction dates and general history, and overall conditions. Some of the actual construction dates are unknown, but it is assumed that they were built in either the same year as their design, or in the year thereafter. All information comes from the Uinta National Forest 7700 Bridge Files. As shown in the Table, this particular bridge style was used on the Uinta National Forest from about 1952 to 1985. The Sixth Water Bridge was the first of its kind built on the Forest, but was rapidly followed by others. It is a difficult style to visualize as "h istoric," because the style was used into the mid-1980's. In addition, all of the bolt hardware on the structures is identical to hardware still used today, as is the treated lumber. Outside of the fact that it is made of wood, there are no architectural or construction details that would appear to a passer-by to be "old. " As a result, we do not think that it currently has value as an interpretive feature. R4-2300-3 (4/83) FSM 2360 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-FS-0080f; UN-00-315) page 60f9 Table 1. Summary of Uinta ~ational Forest Bridges Built in the Treated Lumber Style Name I Location Construction Date I History Condition Sixth Water Bridge (upper Diamond Fork) 1952 Probably did not replace an earlier bridge Good Monk's Hollow Bridge (middle Diamond Fork) 1953-4 (designed in 1953) replaced an earlier bridge May have Good Sterling Ranch Bridge (lower Diamond Fork) 1956-7 (designed in 1956) Replaced an earlier bridge of unknown style Good Diamond Fork Campground (lower Diamond Fork) 1962-3 (designed in 1962) Built as part of original campground construction Good Deer Creek Bridge (Provo Canyon) 1963 Replaced an earlier bridge of unknown style Good Twin Bridge #1 (Payson Canyon) 1985 The first version of this bridge was built in 1975, after an earlier CCC stone bridge was damaged by the 1973 Box Lake Dam failure. The 1975 bridge was badly damaged during the 1984 floods, and was replaced in 1985 by a bridge of the same style and plan. Good Twin Bridge #2 (Payson Canyon) 1979 Replaced a CCC stone bridge, after funds were made available to repair damage caused by the Box Lake Dam failure of 1973. Good There are other bridges of this style on the Forest that will probably remain in place jor many years to come. There are no current plans to replace any of the other bridges, as they all pass safety ratings. The Diamond Campground Bridge, in particular, receives only light campground traffic and will not be replaced in the foreseeable future. It has the best potential to become an interpretive feature, primarily because of its location. The Sixth Water Bridge's primary historic value is in the role it played in improved transportation and range management in this part of the Uinta National Forest. The first road into this area existed by 1901, as July 14 and 15 1902 G.L.D maps in upper Diamond Fork show a road all the way to the Strawberry Ridge. However, this "road" was rudimentary at best. Access into the area grew considerably when a new and much improved road was completed in 1906, which connected Spanish Fork Canyon R4-2300-3 (4/83) FSM 2360 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-F5-0080f; UN-OO-315) page 7 of9 with the newly proposed West Portal Tunnel site. It was built by the Strawberry Water User's Association, in preparation for the Strawberry Water Project (Merrill et aI., 1982:48). This new road through upper Diamond Fork was essential for the development of the Strawberry Water Project. It was the supply conduit for construction equipment and materials, as well as the little town (Camp Clarke) that housed the tunnel construction workers (Merril et aI., 1982). The modern road up Diamond Fork generally follows this construction road right of way, as does Forest Road 029, which connects the main Diamond Fork road with the West Portal and the Strawberry Ridge (see Map 1). About 1.2 miles of the lowest part of Forest Road 029 (which is in the upper half of Section 1 and the northwest corner of Section 6 on Map 2) is part of the Ray's Valley Road Reconstruction project, and the proposed action involves closing this segment in favor of a new segment of road on the slope above (see Map 2). This segment is part of the original West Portal Road corridor. The original 1906 West Portal Road was absorbed by the existing Diamond Fork road, as well as the road that runs up the canyon slope up to the West Portal (now called Forest Road 029). As such, the majority of the original road has been completely rebuilt through the years, and does not have sufficient integrity to be considered a historic property in and of itself. Construction of the Diamond Fork road up to the West Portal certainly opened the upper part of the Diamond Fork watershed to other types of activity as well. Many of its side roads were built to meet the needs of specific uses. For example, the road up Sawmill Hollow, across the canyon from this project area (see Map 1) was created to access a logging operation. The road from the West Portal Road on up to Ray's Valley -- the road containing the Sixth Water Bridge -- was created to meet the needs of stockmen. Livestock grazing has always been one of the most important economic activities in the greater Diamond Fork Watershed (Isbell 1972), and this is particularly the case in the area of Upper Diamond Fork and Ray's Valley (see Map 1). The upper parts of the Diamond Fork watershed, including Ray's Valley, were so badly overgrazed by 1900 that "... the number of sheep herds could be counted by the dust clouds they raised" (Isbell 1972:62). By 1906 a good road, by the standards of the time, existed into upper Diamond Fork. In addition, a 1907 U.S.G.S map of the Strawberry Valley shows a road up into Ray's Valley from Sheep Creek (and Spanish Fork Canyon), as far as Third Water (see Map 1). However, this map does not even indicated a trail connecting these two areas. By 1920, a Uinta National Forest map shows a trail connecting Diamond Fork and Ray's Valley at Third Water. The 1920 "trail" (also called "road" in some places) was built by "stockmen", and all maintenance work was considered the responsibility of the Spanish Fork Livestock Association (Uinta National Forest 7720 Development Roads File for the Ray's Valley Road). R4-2300-3 (4/83) FSM 2360 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-F5-0080f; UN-00-315) page 8 of 9 This might help explain why a transportation corridor on National Forest System lands that appears to so logically connect two active grazing areas remained in such poor condition for so long. Nonetheless, the corridor seems to have been sufficiently important to the Association that they did invest in rudimentary maintenance of the "trail/road." The Forest Service finally began to improve the "road" in 1947, by investing $2,000 in road surface repairs. What might explain this change in Forest Service attitudes toward this feature? Ever since this area had come under Forest Service management in 1905, the agency had worked with the Spanish Fork Livestock Association to improve the existing range conditions, and steady progress had been made through a combination of stock reductions, elimination of common use (having both cattle and sheep on the same lands), and reductions in the season of use. However, some areas had been slow to improve, including Ray's Valley (Map 1). When considerable range rehabilitation money became available in 1947, the Forest Service began construction of a ten mile long fence around Ray's Valley, and by 1949 had reseeded 2,300 acres of ground within that fence. Smaller patches of ground in the area were also reseeded in 1949, such that the Spanish Fork Livestock Association took non-use (kept livestock off some areas) for three years in order to allow the reseeded areas to mature (Isbell 1972:66). It was a shared effort by both the Association and Forest Service that was considered a true range rehabilitation success. It was in the midst of this massive rehabilitation effort that the Forest Service took over responsibility for the management of the Ray's Valley Road. The resurfacing money spent in 1947 was followed by an official declaration of management of the road by the Forest Service in 1949. It is unclear from the 7720 Development Road file if this change in management was necessitated by the road access needs of the reseeding project, or if it was a byproduct of a new system of range management. Perhaps it was both. Either way, by 1949 they had spend another $5,000 in road improvements, and the old "trail" was portrayed as a true road on a 1954 Uinta National Forest Map. Gonstruction of the Sixth Water Bridge appears to have been the final feature of this effort to upgrade the Ray's Valley Road. It was designed in 1951, and built in 1952. It does not appear to replace an earlier bridge, since the 1920 era "trail" shown on the old maps appears to have crossed Sixth Water Greek at either a ford or a small bridge about one 1/8 to 1/4 of a mile downstream. Sixth Water is the channel through which all of the Strawberry water from the West Portal Tunnel flows. As such, it has high flows for most of the spring and summer season. The new bridge would have been an essential feature on a road expected to reliably carry vehicle traffic. In summary, the Ray's Valley Road improvements appear to have been an important com ponent in the 1947-1951 range im provement efforts undertaken in this area collectively by the Uinta National Forest and Spanish Fork Livestock Association . These efforts were one of the first large-scale range rehabilitation programs undertaken on the Forest during the post-GGG era, and were an example for larger watershed rehabilitation efforts in Northern Utah in the 1950's and 1960's. The R4-2300-3 (4/83) FSM 2360 page 90f9 Ray's Valley Road Realignment (U-OO-FS-0080f; UN-00-315) Sixth Water Bridge was an essential part of that road rehabilitation, as it allowed vehicles to pass over the high flows of Sixth Water, and therefore connected Diamond Fork itself with Ray's Valley in a way that had not been possible before. Therefore, we consider the bridge to be Eligible for the National Register under Criterion A, for its association with the locally important event of the Ray's Valley Rehabilitation, and the broader local theme of improved livestock management in the Diamond Fork area. Project Effects Only one archaeological or historic site was identified during inventories for the Ray's Valley Road Realignment Project, which is the Sixth Water Bridge. The preferred alternative on the project proposes to replace the bridge. Since it is considered Eligible for the National Register, than the project will create an Adverse Effect. Mitigation measures are summarized below, and if acceptable, will be formalized in a Memorandum of Agreement between the Utah State Historic Preservation Officer and the Uinta National Forest. A DRAFT of the full agreement is attached. 1. Completion of a full Intensive Level Inventory Form (attached). 2. Completion of a set of Black and White archival quality 3Smm photographs of the bridge in its current condition. 3. Measured plans and drawings of the bridge. 4. Preparation of curriculum for the Diamond Fork Children's Forest that teaches about the effect of roads and bridges (including Sixth Water) on the history and ecology of the Diamond Fork Area. 5. All material on the bridge will all be submitted for filing at State History. Reviewer Date Reviewer Date D References: Isbell, Victor K. 1972 Historical Development of the Spanish Fork Ranger District. Uinta National Forest. Merrill, David and Donald L. Snyder and Jay Anderson 1982 An Historical Mitigation Study of the Strawberry Valley Project, Utah. Mesa Corporation, Orem, Utah. On file, Uinta National Forest. United States Department of Agriculture 2000 Identifying and Preserving Historic Bridges. Engineering Technology and Development Series. Washington DC: Forest Service Engineering Staff. R4-2300-3 (4/83)