[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 113 (Monday, June 14, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31869-31871]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-15018]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary


Relocation of Jeanne d'Arc Statue, Place de France, New Orleans, 
Louisiana

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.

ACTION: Notice--Record of Decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Mayor of the City of New Orleans, Marc. H. Morial, 
requested that the Secretary of the Interior approve the relocation of 
the Place de France, including a statue of Jeanne d'Arc and two bronze 
cannons, now located between the International Trade Mart Building and 
the former Rivergate, to a new location in the Vieux Carre (the French 
Quarter), a National Historic Landmark District. After carefully 
reviewing the effects of this request, the Secretary of the Interior, 
pursuant to Section 705 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 
1970, Public Law 91-609 (the Act), approved this request on June 4, 
1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Geraldine Smith, Superintendent, 
Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve, 365 Canal Street, 
Suite 2400, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-1142. (504) 589-3882.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    In 1971, the City applied for grant funds to develop the park 
currently known as the Place de France (and also the Joan of Arc Plaza) 
under the Act. The Place contains a gilded bronze statue of Jeanne 
d'Arc and two bronze cannons manufactured during the Napoleonic Empire 
donated to the City by the French Government. The City constructed the 
Place de France in 1972 with these grant funds. Section 705 of the Act 
states, ``[n]o open-space land involving historic or architectural 
purposes for which assistance has been granted under this title shall 
be converted to use for any other purpose without the prior approval of 
the Secretary of the Interior.'' In Louisiana Landmarks Society, Inc. 
v. City of New Orleans, No. 94-3880 (E.D. La. 1995), rev'd on other 
grounds, 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir. 1996), the Court found that 
Section 705 applied to the Place de France. Therefore, the approval of 
the Secretary must be granted prior to change of use of the Place de 
France.
    The question of what regulatory framework must be applied to the 
request for approval of the Secretary of the relocation was raised by 
the Louisiana Landmarks Society (letter dated April 17, 1999). No 
regulations presently exist that implement Section 705 of the Act. In 
deleting regulations that existed prior to 1982, HUD explained that 
``[to] the extent that there are still ongoing projects remaining under 
these programs, they continue to be governed by the requirements of the 
enabling legislation under which they were funded since those statutes 
remain in effect, as well as the obligations under the respective grant 
and/or loan contracts with HUD.'' 47 FR 1117 (January, 1982), see also, 
Louisiana Landmarks Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, Etc. Civ. No. 
94-3880 (E.D. La 1994), rev. on other grounds Louisiana Landmarks 
Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, Etc. 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir. 
1996).
    The Louisiana Landmarks Society suggests that the Secretary look to 
HUD's repealed regulations for guidance on what issues the Secretary 
must consider, prior to making his decision. However, the repealed 
regulations did not set forth any standard that the Secretary should 
follow in making his decision under the Act. Therefore, the repealed 
regulations provide no guidance to the Secretary.
    The Louisiana Landmarks Society suggests, in the alternative, that 
the Secretary should look to the Land and Water Conservation Act (LWCF) 
rules on conversion and apply those standards in making his decision. 
However, the LWCF rules are not applicable in this situation. The LWCF 
specifically requires the Secretary to consider specific issues prior 
to making his determination approving or denying a conversion request 
for conversion of properties funded by that particular program. See, 16 
U.S.C. 460l-8(f)(3) (``No property acquired or developed with 
assistance under this section shall, without the approval of the 
Secretary, be converted to other than public outdoor recreation uses. 
The Secretary shall approve such conversion only if he finds it to be 
in accord with the then existing comprehensive statewide outdoor 
recreation plan and only upon such conditions as he deems necessary to 
assure the substitution of other recreation properties of at least 
equal fair substitution of other recreation properties of at least 
equal fair market value and of reasonably equivalent usefulness and 
locations * * *'') However, the Act is a distinct funding statute with 
a unique statutory framework. Applying the recreational standards of 
the LWCF to this HUD urban grant program would be inappropriate.
    The plain language of the Act grants the Secretary the authority to 
make his approval decision in his discretion. Further, this decision is 
informed by compliance with all other applicable laws. Specifically, 
the Secretary considers the effects of the relocation on the 
environment, the Vieux Carre Historic District, and the Place itself.
    Although the Secretary has noted the local planning process, the 
Secretary's

[[Page 31870]]

decision is not based on an evaluation of the appropriateness of that 
process or on any other decisions made at the local level, nor does it 
purport to comply with the mandates or responsibilities of any other 
federal agency. This decision merely responds to a specific request 
made by the City, and is made solely in accordance with Section 705 of 
the Act.
    In making this decision, the Secretary considered the effects of 
the relocation on the environment, the historic district, and the Place 
itself. Due to construction adjacent to the Place de France, the City, 
by letter dated October 29, 1998 from Mayor Marc H. Morial, requested 
that the Secretary approve relocation of the Place, the statue and the 
cannons from the current location to the Decatur Street/North Peters 
Street Triangle in the French Quarter.
    On February 18, 1999, although not required by law, the Department 
of the Interior published notice of the request of the City of New 
Orleans for the Secretary's approval of the proposed relocation for a 
thirty day public comment period. 64 FR 8110. In response to a request 
from the public, the Department extended the public comment period by 
fifteen days through April 6, 1999. 64 FR 14936. Approximately 220 
individuals, organizations or public bodies responded. Of these 
responses, 191 were from individuals who signed or drafted identical 
petitions.

Summary of Comments Received

Historic Preservation Issues

    Several of the commentators raised questions as to the eligibility 
of the Place, including the Jeanne d'Arc statue, for inclusion on the 
National Register of Historic Places. To address this concern, the 
Department made a request to the Keeper of the National Register for a 
determination of eligibility of the Place, including the Jeanne d'Arc 
statute, in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of 
1966, as amended.
    On April 12, 1999, the Keeper determined that neither the Place de 
France, nor the Jeanne d'Arc statue, was eligible for inclusion in the 
National Register. The Keeper noted that the Place is associated with 
the special relationship between New Orleans and France, and that the 
statue itself ``is clearly an important work of art.'' However, neither 
the relationship, nor the statue met the basic requirements for 
Register eligibility. The Keeper's decision addresses an issue that was 
not resolved in the underlying litigation. In Louisiana Landmarks 
Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, No.94-3880 (E.D. La. 1995), rev'd 
on other grounds, 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir. 1996), the court found only 
that the property had ``historic purposes'' under the Act.
    The Keeper additionally noted that ``the integrity of both the 
Place de France and the Jeanne d'Arc statue has been compromised by 
recent changes'' and that the Place de France has been ``seriously 
impacted by the adjacent construction.''
    According to the Mayor, the relocation site for the Place was 
identified by the staff of the City Planning Commission in consultation 
with the staff of the City's Arts Council. In selecting this site, the 
City took into consideration the following seven factors: (1) urban 
prominence; (2) scale/urban context; (3) visibility as a deterrent to 
potential vandalism; (4) pedestrian and vehicular safety; (5) 
suitability for designated functions; (6) stated wishes of identified 
interest groups; and (7) favorable comparison to the previous 
installation. In selecting this site, the City consulted with the 
French community in the City, with Consul General Mme. Lenoir-Bertrand 
and with Ambassador Francois Bujon de L'Estang. Additionally, the Vieux 
Carre Commission, with review and approval authority of all 
architectural and design actions in the Vieux Carre, unanimously 
approved the proposed relocation site at a public meeting on March 16, 
1999.
    Because the City's identified relocation site for the Place, 
including the Jeanne d'Arc statue, was within the Vieux Carre Historic 
District, the Department evaluated the effect of the relocation on the 
District. The Department consulted with the Advisory Council on 
Historic Preservation as required by Section 106 of the National 
Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and 36 CFR Part 800. The 
National Park Service determined that the effect of the project on the 
District would not be adverse. Both the Louisiana State Historic 
Preservation Officer (by letter dated April 28, 1999) and the Advisory 
Council on Historic Preservation (by letter dated May 4, 1999) 
concurred with this determination.

Environmental Issues

    To identify and analyze potential environmental effects of the 
proposed action, the Department prepared an Environmental Assessment 
(EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. On April 
30, 1999, a notice of availability of the EA was published in the 
Federal Register. 64 FR 23354. A notice of the availability of the EA 
was published in the local New Orleans newspaper, the Times-Picayune, 
beginning Tuesday, May 4, 1999 and running for three days. And the 
Department additionally sent notice directly to individuals who 
provided comments to the Secretary earlier. Interested parties were 
given the opportunity to submit any comments on the EA for thirty days 
from publication of availability of the EA. The last day for comments 
on the Environmental Assessment was June 1, 1999. The National Park 
Service received less than 10 comments on the EA.
    The comments received and considered by the National Park Service 
included those comments received in response to the Federal Register 
notices of February 18 (the petitioners) and April 28, 1999 (the 
respondents). These comments or concerns fell into several general 
categories: (1) Cultural resources; (2) the current Place de France 
location; (3) the proposed Place de France location; (4) Harrah's 
Casino; and (5) general comments.
    With reference to the cultural resources there was one comment to 
the April 28 Federal Register notice which asked about the status of 
the current Place de France and the Jeanne d'Arc statue for listing in 
the National Register. The Keeper of the National Register of Historic 
Places issued a formal determination that neither the current Place de 
France nor the statue were eligible for the National Register.
    The current Place de France location drew comments from the 
petitioners and three respondents to the April 28 notice in the Federal 
Register. The petitioners expressed a preference for the current Place 
de France because of the contributions of Samuel Wilson, a New Orleans 
architect and preservationist. The Keeper of the National Register said 
that notwithstanding the importance of Mr. Wilson, properties less than 
fifty years old, which this property is, must be shown to be 
exceptionally important to be eligible for listing in the National 
Register. The Place de France does not meet this test. Three 
respondents to the April 28 notice opined that the current Place de 
France is a better location to commemorate international trade and 
commerce. However, no supporting data was presented to support this 
position and the National Park Service found this position 
unpersuasive.
    The proposed Place de France generated the most comments. Five 
respondents to the April 28 notice in the Federal Register found the 
proposed location in the Vieux Carre to be more aesthetically pleasing 
for display of the statue. One respondent said that there were multiple 
locations in the Vieux Carre, including the proposed location, that 
would be preferable to the current

[[Page 31871]]

location. Six respondents found the Vieux Carre preferable to 
commemorate the French heritage of New Orleans. Additionally in a 
letter prior to the February 18 notice in the Federal Register the 
French Ambassador expressed the same opinion. One respondent was 
concerned about the possible deleterious effects of air pollution on 
the statue. The National Park Service has no substantive information 
indicating that the Vieux Carre location would be more damaging than 
the current location. It was also noted that New Orleans currently 
meets all National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Finally, the 
petitioners and six respondents raised concerns about safety at the 
proposed location. However, no evidence was presented that suggested 
that the relocated Place would attract large crowds of visitors, 
causing significant impacts to the new location. Furthermore, the City 
has committed to taking appropriate safety measures on those days that 
large crowds may be anticipated, such as Bastille Day. Thus, the 
National Park Service found these concerns to be adequately addressed 
if large crowds of visitors were ever to occur.
    Harrah's Casino was also a topic that generated comment by both the 
petitioners and four respondents. These parties expressed 
dissatisfaction with the location of the casino and the role it has 
played in the proposed relocation of the Place de France. The National 
Park Service properly noted that the role of the casino on decisions of 
the city of New Orleans is not an issue before the Department of the 
Interior. Likewise the location of the casino is not a consideration of 
the Department of the Interior. We do note, however, that the casino 
has agreed to pay all costs associated with relocation of the Place de 
France, the statue and cannon to the Vieux Carre.
    Finally, there were numerous comments that are difficult to 
categorize. First, the petitioners and two respondents expressed 
concern that the current Place de France had already been badly damaged 
during the demolition of the Rivergate complex. The National Park 
Service acknowledged the fact that the site was partially demolished 
when the city of New Orleans attempted to move the statue in 1994 but 
noted that the cannon and were not damaged. Also the National Park 
Service pointed out that nothing was damaged that cannot be replaced or 
redesigned at the Vieux Carre location. Second the petitioners and 
three respondents challenged the adequacy of the City's rationale to 
relocate Place de France. The National Park Service correctly pointed 
out that the only question before the Department of the Interior is the 
proposed move, not the rationale for the move. Third, there were 
questions about the regulatory framework under which the Secretary 
would make a decision on the City's request. The National Park 
Service's response was similar to the discussion on this same issue 
provided earlier in this Record of Decision. Lastly, nine respondents 
asked about reviews and approvals by various local agencies. The 
National Park Service referenced the respondents to the site selection 
process employed by the New Orleans Planning Commission and Arts 
Council and the approval of the Vieux Carre Commission.
    The National Park Service issued a Finding of No Significant Impact 
(FONSI) on the proposed relocation on June 3, 1999, finding that the 
Secretary's approval of the request of the City does not constitute a 
major Federal action significantly affecting the human environment.

    Dated: June 4, 1999.
Robert J. Lamb,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy Management and Budget.
[FR Doc. 99-15018 Filed 6-11-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-70-P