2005 Indiana Association of County Commissioners Conference

1

• 2005 Indiana Association of County Commissioners
  Conference

2

• Established Federal Policy to
• Foster productive harmony between modern society
  and historic resources.
• Provide preservation leadership.
• Administer historic resources in a spirit of
  stewardship.
• Assist preservation efforts of the State and
  local governments, tribes, Native Hawaiian
  organizations,and the private sector.

3

• Requires Federal agency to take into account
  the effects of their undertakings on a place
  listed on or eligible for the National Register
  of Historic Places.
• Requires the agency to give the Advisory Council
  on Historic Preservation an opportunity to
  comment on those effects.

4

• Independent Federal agency created by the NHPA
• Advises President and Congress on historic
  preservation matters
• Oversees Section 106 process
• Reviews Federal agency historic preservation
  programs and policies
• Encourages public interest and participation in
  preservation

5

• Council participates in review
• To resolve disputes
• When necessary to ensure purposes of Section 106
  and NHPA are met

6

• Section 106 compliance is a Federal agency
  responsibility.
• The Federal agencys responsibility cannot be
  delegated, except by statute.
• The Federal agency may use contractors to
  complete the work, however, it must meet current
  standards.

7

• Step 1 - Initiation of the Section 106 process
• Identification of potential consulting parties
• Research of properties within the project area
• Early coordination
• Establish Area of Potential Effect (APE)
• APE is the area (s) in which the undertaking may
  cause alterations in character or use of
  historic property.

8

• Step 2 Identification of Historic Properties
• Consultation with Consulting Parties (i.e. local
  historians, county historical societies, and
  state historical societies)
• Review existing information - Historical
  Research and Surveys (i.e. County Interim
  Reports, Dr. James Coopers historic bridge
  survey books and any other available data)
• Coordination with the Indiana State Historic
  Preservation Officer
• Federal agency makes eligibility determination(s)

9

• Step 3 - Assessment of Effects
• Consult with the SHPO
• Determination of Effect
• No Historic Properties Affected
• No Adverse Effect
• Adverse Effect
• Determination of Effect forwarded to consulting
  parties for review
• Offer Public Opportunity to Review

10

• Step 4 Resolution of Adverse Effects
• Evaluate options of avoiding or minimizing the
  adverse effect
• Draft a Memorandum of Agreement providing
  stipulations that minimize the adverse effect
• The ACHP will be contacted for comment if a
  Memorandum of Agreement cannot be agreed upon.

11

• Process must be initiated early in the project
  planning
• Alternatives should be available for
  consideration
• Section 106 process must be completed prior to
• Expenditure of Federal Funds
• Issuance of Federal Permits or Licenses

12

• Projects, activities, or programs under direct or
  indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency
• Includes activities that
• Are carried out by or on behalf of Federal agency
• Receive Federal funding
• Require a Federal permit, license, or approval
• Are regulated under delegated Federal programs

13

• Properties Listed on or eligible for the
  National Register of Historic Places
• Districts, sites, buildings, structures and
  objects
• Significant in American history, architecture,
  archaeology, engineering, and culture
• Generally at least 50 years old
• Meet one or more of the criteria of eligibility
• Retain enough integrity to convey their
  meaning and importance

14

• Association with events
• Association with people
• Distinctive design/construction
• Distinctive design/construction
• Work of a Master
• Artistic value
• A distinguishable entity
• Data Potential

15

• Properties must have integrity of (as appropriate)

• Location
• Setting
• Design
• Materials
• Workmanship
• Feeling
• Association

16

• The term Section 4 (f) refers to the original
  section number in the Department of
  Transportation Act of 1966. Because of
  subsequent revisions to the law, this language is
  now found in slightly different forms.
• The secretary of transportation may approve
  transportation programs or projects requiring the
  use of land of an historic site of national,
  state, or local significance only if
• There is no prudent and feasible alternative to
  using that land and
• The program or project includes all possible
  planning to minimize harm to the historic site
  resulting from the use.

17

• Criterion or criteria of eligibility and
  character defining features of historic property
  determine what is a substantial impairment, the
  standard for constructive use.
• Criteria of eligibility and qualities of
  integrity determine what would have to be done to
  minimize harm.
• Process of minimizing harm is same as process of
  resolving adverse effect under Section 106.
• An adverse effect under Section 106 is not
  necessarily a use under Section 4 (f) a use
  under Section 4 (f) is not necessarily an adverse
  effect under Section 106.

18

• The Board of Gibson County Commissioners required
  a new facility at a crossing over the Patoka
  River for the following reasons
• Poor site geometry
• Poor condition of the existing facility
• Load limitation
• Limited Horizontal and Vertical Clearance

19

• Gibson County Bridge No. 398 is a single-span
  Warren steel through truss superstructure that
  was constructed circa 1908.
• The bridge is one of the oldest Warren trusses
  known to have been fabricated by the Indiana
  Bridge Company.
• The bridge is one of the earliest all-riveted
  surviving through trusses of its type.
• The bridge is considered to be individually
  eligible for inclusion in the National Register
  of Historic Places due to its engineering
  significance.

20

• Early Coordination Letters sent to state and
  local consulting parties as well as the Indiana
  SHPO.
• The Indiana SHPO verified the structure was
  eligible for the National Register of Historic
  Places.
• Structure was determined to be statewide and
  locally significant.

21

• The project design required the facility be built
  on a new alignment to correct poor site
  geometry.
• A consulting parties meeting was held at the
  project site. Several consulting parties,
  Gibson County Officials, FHWA and Indiana SHPO
  were in attendance.
• Gibson County Officials agreed to rehabilitate
  and maintain the existing bridge.

22

• The project resulted in an Adverse Effect on
  Gibson County Bridge No. 398 due to the change in
  the intended use of the existing bridge.
• MOA was developed between the FHWA, Gibson
  County, Indiana Department of Transportation and
  SHPO for the rehabilitation of the existing
  structure.
• The FHWA agreed to provide the funding for the
  rehabilitation of the existing structure through
  Transportation Enhancement Funds.

23

• The project is planned for construction in 2007.