Driving Indiana’s Economic Growth. Management and Preservation of Indiana's Historic Bridges: A Programmatic Approach Thanks to Mead & Hunt & FHWA-IN.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and Section 106
Advertisements

Initiated in 2007 with a study population of bridges are considered historic and eligible or listed on the National Register 111 Bridges are.
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class.
The Ohio Department of Transportation’s work to preserve low-volume bridges in place or to move to trails (and thereby avoid a Section 106 Adverse Effect)
Program Alternatives under 36 CFR Part 800 Dave Berwick Army Affairs Coordinator Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
New I-65 Interchange at Worthsville Road Welcome!.
Section 106, Section 4(f) and You!: The Role of Consulting Parties in Transportation Projects Kevin Mock, Historic Preservation Specialist Pennsylvania.
U.S. 421 Bridge DES# Thursday, July 17, :30 p.m. Frankfort Community Public Library 208 West Clinton Street, Frankfort, IN.
National Bridge Inspection Standards (NBIS)
S.R. 256 Road Reconstruction Project From City of Austin to S.R. 203 Thursday, February 6, 2014 Austin Elementary School 6:00 p.m.
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACT of 1966 as amended Garry J. Cantley Regional Archeologist Bureau of Indian Affairs.
Update on Historic Bridges MaryAnn Naber Federal Highway Administration June 17, 2008.
Cultural Resources Management in the USFWS. Overview of Laws & Regulations 1906 – Present.
November 22, 2011 Historical Commission Mission : To promote, preserve and protect Alachua County’s historic resources.
Woodland-Larchmere Commercial Historic District Cleveland, Shaker Heights, Cuyahoga County, Ohio National Register Public Hearing May 21, 2015 Barbara.
Cultural Resource Management Plans What good are they?
NHPA, Section 106, and NEPA Highlights and Misconceptions.
Feasibility Studies National Heritage Areas. Initiating National Heritage Areas National Heritage Area designations have been initiated in four different.
Environmental Review Todd Levine Architectural historian, environmental reviewer, Connecticut Freedom Trail coordinator, Washington- Rochambeau Revolutionary.
Federal Preservation Activities: Part 1. What did With Heritage So Rich (1965) and the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 provide to administer.
Connecticut Department of Transportation Bureau of Policy & Planning.
Sacred Sites. Documentation Documentation: Forest Supervisor or Ranger District Offices may document Sacred site (s) information in a variety of ways.
Ohio Historic Preservation Office
Section 106 Processes A Guide to the Ideals and Reals of CRM.
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA): Overview
THE FOUR STEP SECTION 106 PROCESS: AN INTRODUCTION TENNESSEE STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICE REVIEW AND COMPLIANCE SECTION All reproduction rights reserved.
Barrington Road at Jane Addams Memorial Tollway (Interstate 90) Interchange Improvement Study Hoffman Estates Village Hall June 27, 2012.
COSCDA Workshop Renovation, Reconstruction and Renewal of Historic Properties and Neighborhoods Section 106 and Programmatic Agreements Overview.
Monroe Executed Programmatic Agreement The Army’s Responsibilities Include: Identify Significant Viewsheds (initiated)-18 Months =Oct 2010 Cultural Landscape.
Meeting Agenda Stakeholder Participation Panel July 14, 2003 Welcome/Introductions Study Overview Tasks/Products/Schedule Traffic Patterns Break Key Project.
I Larry Heil, FHWA October 15, 2003 Environmental Streamlining.
SAFETEA-LU Changes  Exemption of the Interstate System from Section 4(f) [Section 6007]  de minimis impacts to historic sites [Section 6009(a)]  de.
Mitigation in the Section 106 Process Dave Berwick Army Program Manager Advisory Council on Historic Preservation.
1 ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING CULTURAL RESOURCES LAWS AND REGULATIONS CH 5 CH 5 HO # 13, 13a, 13b
1 Context Sensitive Design CE 453 Highway Design Iowa State University Howard R. Green Company.
INTRODUCTION TO SECTION 4(f) Presented by Ian Chidister Environmental Program Manager FHWA – Wisconsin Division December 4, 2013.
Nadine Peterson Preservation Planner NH Division of Historical Resources Lynne E. Monroe Preservation Company Christopher W. Closs Christopher W. Closs.
Integrating Other Laws into BLM Planning. Objectives Integrate legal requirements into the planning process. Discuss laws with review and consultation.
Programmatic Regulations PDT Workshop COMPREHENSIVE EVERGLADES RESTORATION PLAN April 18, 2002.
State Road 5 over Eel River Bridge Rehabilitation DES# South Whitley Community Public Library Thursday, February 5, :30 p.m. Please silence.
1 Implementing the Concepts Environment Pre-Conference Workshop TRB MPOs Present and Future Conference August 27, 2006 Michael Culp FHWA Office of Project.
National Historic Districts And Why Taylor Should Be Among Them.
By Rachel Coleman.  “ The head of any federal agency having direct or indirect jurisdiction over a proposed federal or federally assisted undertaking.
Historical Resources SURVEY SAVVY Marie Nelson State Historian II OHP-Survey/CLG Coordinator Sep 07 – Chico.
D.d. delivers district department of transportation d.d. delivers FAISAL HAMEED RONALDO T. NICHOLSON. P.E. Innovative Project Delivery Processes Innovative.
Army BRAC Historic Preservation Opportunities and Challenges.
1 Historic Preservation Webinar "Reporting Through PAGE and to PMC"
Categorical Exclusion Training Class
Historic Preservation Memoranda of Agreement. What is an MOA? As part of the Section 106 review process, it is an agreement among an agency official,
I-465 at I-65 Interchange Modification Public Meeting 6:00pm Monday, October 1, 2012 South Grove Intermediate School Beech Grove, Indiana.
South Dakota State Historic Preservation Office and the Nebraska National Forests and Grasslands July 24, 2013 National Grasslands Visitor Center.
The Climate Action Task Force’s Transportation Workgroup October 16, 2008 FacOps Conference Room B.
Connecting South Dakota and the Nation Access Management Training Brooke White, Access Management Engineer.
Executive Order Environmental Stewardship and Transportation Infrastructure Project Reviews Priority Issues.
Integration of National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) NEPA and NHPA A Handbook for Integrating NEPA and.
The National Register. The National Register of Historic Places The National Register of Historic Places is authorized by Section 101 (a)(1)(A)of the.
Community Crossings Matching Grant Fund Program Kathy Eaton-McKalip
Office of Transportation Planning Modal Planning Update
101 New London Road Newark, Delaware
The Historic Bridge Project Development Process.
Susan Barnes Vice-Chairman Advisory Council on Historic Preservation
Cultural Resources Categorical Exclusion Training Class – Presented by the Office of Environmental Services.
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
Protecting What We Love Building What We Need – The “H” Factor
Browne’s Addition Local Historic District Plan Commission Workshop #1
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
National Historic Preservation Act
Section 3 FOR HUD USE ONLY.
Presentation transcript:

Driving Indiana’s Economic Growth

Management and Preservation of Indiana's Historic Bridges: A Programmatic Approach Thanks to Mead & Hunt & FHWA-IN Division for portions of this presentation

Purpose of the Program Streamline the Section 106 review process for projects involving historic bridges Prioritization mechanism

Definitions What is a Historic Bridge? A bridge that is listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. What is the “National Register of Historic Places”? The official inventory of districts, sites, buildings, structures and objects significant in American history, architecture, archaeology and culture, which is maintained by the Secretary of the Interior…

Definitions What is Section 106 Review? Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 requires Federal agencies to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment on these undertakings.

o Historic Bridge Inventory o Historic Bridge Management Process o Incentives for bridge owners to preserve our important historic resources Program Goals

Savings in Cost and Time o National Register of Historic Places eligibility and appropriate mitigation measures are known up front o Elimination of controversy o Historic bridge project consistency

Section 106 o Monetary Costs - $1k- $10k per bridge * 6,300 bridges! o Complex Timelines - Can take months

Programmatic Agreement (PA) Executed in August 2006 Signatories o FHWA o SHPO o ACHP Invited Signatory o INDOT Concurring Parties o Historic Spans Task Force o Historic Landmarks Foundation of Indiana (HLFI)

Key Stipulations of the PA o “Standards for Rehabilitation of Bridges on Low-Volume Roads” o Statewide bridge survey o Identify each historic bridge as either Select or Non-select. o Project Development Process for Select and Non-select bridges.

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation I.A. INDOT will implement the following actions or program updates within one (1) year of executing this Agreement: Develop and include “Standards for Rehabilitation of Bridges on Low-Volume Roads” in the INDOT design manual.

“Standards for Rehabilitation of Bridges on Low-Volume Roads” Based on best practices from: o AASHTO “Green Book” o AASHTO Low Volume Road Guide o FHWA Guidance o INDOT Design Manual

“Standards for Rehabilitation of Bridges on Low-Volume Roads” Design factors considered: o Structural Capacity o Hydraulic Improvements o Width o Bridge Railing o Approach Guardrail o Design Speed o Approach Roadway

Economic Criteria: Select Bridge o Cost of Rehabilitation < 80% of Cost of Replacement = Rehab warranted o Cost of Rehabilitation ≥ 80% of Cost of Replacement = Further consultation on rehab possible “Standards for Rehabilitation of Bridges on Low-Volume Roads”

Economic & Other Criteria Non-Select Bridge o Cost of Rehabilitation ≥ 40% of cost of replacement = Replacement warranted o Two or more “other factors” apply = Replacement warranted

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation I.A o Standards were announced March 22, 2007 o Standards became effective April 2, 2007 o Standards can be found online:

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation II. Bridge Survey Please visit INDOT’s Historic Bridges Inventory website at:

Historic Context Study o Identify major trends in transportation and bridge building o Based on state-level research and oral histories o Draws from INDOT bridge database

Historic Context Study Available Online

Field Survey o Documented individual bridges o Included bridge-specific research o Completed October 2007

Evaluate National Register eligibility o Review collected data o Tie to historic context results o Use point system

National Register evaluation system STEP 3 Establish National Register eligibility STEP 1 Determine significance STEP 2 Assess historic integrity

National Register evaluation system o Criterion A – Historic events and themes o Criterion C – Engineering and artistic value o Criteria B and D – not applicable

National Register evaluation system o Design o Workmanship o Materials o Location o Setting

Integrity considerations

National Register evaluation system o Established list of eligible and not eligible bridges o Provided justification o Opportunity for public comment o Agencies made final determination o Results posted on website:

Select & Non-Select Bridges Select historic bridges: those most suitable for preservation that are excellent examples of a given type of historic bridge Non-select historic bridges: those not considered excellent examples of a given type of historic bridge and are not suitable candidates for preservation.

Select & Non-Select Criteria

Select & Non-Select Criteria: Individual Review

Methodology to Identify Select and Non-Select Bridges

Programmatic Agreement Development Process o Select Bridges Must be Preserved o Non-select Bridges may be destroyed if other alternatives are determined neither feasible nor prudent

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Select Bridges Must be Preserved First option: Rehabilitation in place for vehicular use

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Select Bridges Must be Preserved o Second option: By-pass alternative o Third option: Preserve at an alternate location

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Rehabilitation—Key points: o Bridge rehabilitated in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation, or as close to the Standards as is practicable. o SHPO reviews rehabilitation plans.

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Rehabilitation—Key points: o Maintenance commitment o Photo documentation o Maintain National Register listing

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Non-Select Bridge Project Development o First option: Rehabilitation in place for vehicular use

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Non-Select Bridge Project Development o Second option: Advertise for other entities

Overview of Key Stipulations of PA Stipulation III. Project Development Process for Historic Bridges Demolition—Key points: o Photo documentation o Possible salvage of bridge elements

Upcoming Project Milestones Public Release of Select/Non-Select List—late August 60 day comment period on Select/Non-Select list ends— late October Consideration of comments on Select/Non-Select list by project team & finalization of report—Nov.-Dec Public Release of final Select/Non-Select Report—late December 2009

How does the PA benefit bridge owners? o Reduction of uncertainties associated with bridge project development process o Funding opportunities

How does the PA benefit the Preservation Community? Genuine preservation commitment

Issues & Challenges o Initial Cost o Time to complete o Contract changes

Issues & Challenges o Amount of data o Stakeholder participation

For more information: INDOT Mary Kennedy ( ) Staffan Peterson ( ) FHWA-IN Division Larry Heil ( ) Janice Osadczuk ( )

Questions?