[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