No CrossRef data available.
Article contents
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS & CASE STUDIES: Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966: A Streamlined Approach for Sidewalk Improvement Projects
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 29 April 2010
Abstract
Federally funded projects must comply with a suite of environmental federal regulations, including the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 and the US Department of Transportation Act of 1966, which are addressed through the National Environmental Policy Act process. In this case study, we describe a Federal Highway Administration sidewalk improvement project implemented by the Georgia Department of Transportation in DeKalb County, Georgia, that used an innovative streamlined process under the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 to evaluate and assess effects on historic resources and to comply with National Environmental Policy Act process. This project also represents a novel use of this Streamlined Section 106 Process, since it was used in a new sidewalk construction project that required right-of-way acquisition and easements as compared to previous projects where this streamlined process was used only in cases with existing sidewalks and no right-of-way acquisition. Additionally, we demonstrate how coordination under the National Environmental Policy Act addressed impacts on historic resources and resulted in the successful preservation of cultural resource features.
Environmental Practice 12:134–143 (2010)
- Type
- Features
- Information
- Copyright
- Copyright © National Association of Environmental Professionals 2010
References
American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). 2009. Practitioner's Handbook 11: Complying with Section 4(f) of the U.S. DOT Act. AASHTO, Center for Environmental Excellence, Washington, DC, 32 pp. Available at http://environment.transportation.org/center/products_programs/practitioners_handbooks.aspx#11 (accessed December 21, 2009).Google Scholar
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2005a, March 1. Section 4(f) Policy Paper. US Department of Transportation, FHWA, Office of Planning, Environment and Realty, Project Development and Environmental Review, Washington, DC, 35 pp. Available at http://www.environment.fhwa.dot.gov/projdev/4fpolicy.asp (accessed December 21, 2009).Google Scholar
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2005b, December 13. Action: Guidance for Determining De Minimis Impacts to Section 4(f) Resources [Memorandum]. FHWA, Washington, DC. Available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/HEP/guidedeminimis.htm (accessed December 21, 2009).Google Scholar
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). 2005c, December 13. Questions and Answers on the Application of the Section 4(f) De Minimis Impact Criteria. FHWA, Washington, DC. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/qasdeminimus.htm (accessed December 21, 2009).Google Scholar
Garner, B.A., ed. 1999. Black's Law Dictionary, 7th edition. West Publishing, Eagan, MN, 1738 pp.Google Scholar
King, Thomas F. 2008. Cultural Resource Laws and Practice, 3rd edition. Heritage Resources Management series.AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 442 pp.Google Scholar
US Department of Interior, National Park Service. 2002. National Register Bulletin: Historic Residential Suburbs—Guidelines for Evaluation and Documentation for the National Register of Historic Places. National Park Service, Washington, DC, 136 pp. Available at http://www.nps.gov/nr/publications/bulletins/suburbs/INDEX.htm (accessed December 21, 2009).Google Scholar