HomeMy WebLinkAbout2017 - Programmatic Agreement
DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY
JACKSONVILLE DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS
400 HIGH POINT DRIVE, SUITE 600
COCOA, FLORIDA 32926
REPLY TO
ATTENTION OF
June 5, 2017
Regulatory Division
North Permits Branch
Cocoa Permits Section
SAJ-2012-01564(SP-AWP)
Dr. Timothy Parsons
Compliance and Review
R. A. Gray Building
500 S. Bronough Street, Room 423
Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0250
ATTN: Ginny Jones
Dear Dr. Parsons:
This letter is in reference to Programmatic Agreement(PA)among
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, U.S. Coast Guard, the Florida State Historic
Preservation Officer, All Aboard Florida –Operations, LLC,and the Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation regarding compliance with Section 106 ofthe National Historic
Preservation Act for the All Aboard Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project Phase II
Orlando to West Palm Beach, Florida.
By electronic letter on May 17, 2017, your office provided recommended changes to
the PA. In addition the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation(ACHP)
recommended minor additions to the PA by electronic letter on May 24, 2017. The U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) acknowledges the value of the recommendations and
thePAhas been amended.The amended PA was provided to your office by electronic
letter, June 1, 2017 for review and consideration.
The Corps request that you sign the attached PAand return it to Andrew Phillips at
the letterhead address.Upon receipt of your signature the Corps will obtain signatures
from the remaining signatories.
-2-
If you have any questions or comments concerning the PA, please contact the
project manager, Andrew Phillipsat the letterhead address, by emailat
andrew.w.phillips@usace.army.mil or by phone at 321-504-3771 ex 14.
Sincerely,
for
Donald W. Kinard
Chief, Regulatory Division
Enclosure
cc: (electronically)
U.S. Coast Guard; Randy Overton
U.S. Coast Guard; Barry Dragon
Indian River County Attorney; Kate Cotner
AAF; Jose Gonzalez
CESAJ-OC-T
CESAJ-RD
PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENTAMONG
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS,U.S. COAST GUARD,THE FLORIDA STATE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER,ALL ABOARD FLORIDA –
OPERATIONS, LLC,AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC
PRESERVATIONREGARDING COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 106 OF THE
NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACTFOR THE ALL ABOARD
FLORIDA INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT PHASE IIORLANDO TO
WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
Preamble
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) served as the lead federal agency for National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) compliance through publication of a Final Environmental
Impact Statement (FEIS)on August 4, 2015 for the All Aboard Florida Intercity Passenger
Rail Project(Project).OnJune 27, 2016, FRA notified the U.S. Army Corpsof Engineers
andU.S. Coast Guard, both cooperating agencies, that it wouldnot bemaking a decision
onAll Aboard Florida -Operations, LLC (All Aboard Florida or AAF)application for
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing program(a/k/a "RRIF") to fund Phase
IIof the Project.FRA is not executing the draft Programmatic Agreement previously
circulated with the Consulting Parties.
The applicant, AAF, will implement the Projectthrough a phased approach. Phase I
willprovide passenger rail service along 66.5 miles of the Florida East Coast Railroad
(FECR) Corridor connecting West Palm Beach, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami. AAF
has obtained private financing for Phase I and is proceeding to implement Phase I.
Phase II would extend service from West Palm Beach to Orlando, Florida.
AAF prepared an Environmental Assessment and Section 4(f) Statement (EA) for
Phase I includingstations and the vehicle maintenance facility (VMF).The EA was
reviewed, revised, and adoptedby FRA for public circulation and comment from
October 31, 2012 through December 3, 2012.FRA issued a finding of no significant
impact (FONSI) on January31, 2013 for passenger rail service and rail and station
improvements proposed by AAFwithinPhase I.Since the 2013 Phase I FONSI, AAF
proposed and FRA has evaluated a new location for the Fort Lauderdale Station and
issued a re-evaluation decision that found no significant difference from the location
evaluated in the 2012 EA. Also since the 2013 Phase I FONSI, AAF proposed and
FRA has evaluated a new location in West Palm Beach for the proposed Fort
Lauderdale layover and maintenance facility. FRA issued a Supplemental EA and
subsequently issued a FONSI for this element of Phase IinJanuary 2015.FRA
concludedin their 2012 EAthat Phase I has independent utility from Phase II (that is,
it could be advanced and serve a transportation need even if Phase II were not
constructed).
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) also concluded that Phase I has
independent utility of Phase II. The Corps issued single and complete Nationwide
permit verifications (33 C.F.R. §325.5(c)(2)) for minor shoreline stabilization and loss
of mangrove habitats required to implement bridge improvements associated with
Phase I. See table 1 below for Department of the Army (DA) permit numbers and
project locations.
1
June 1, 2017
DA Mile LatitudeLongitude
WaterwayCityCounty
NumberPost(north)(west)
SAJ-2013-MP Palm
C-51 Canal26.618880.0590Lake Worth
00379304.05Beach
C-16
SAJ-2013-MP Boynton Boynton Palm
26.525480.0590
00378311.45Beach BeachBeach
Canal
SAJ-2013-MP Hillsboro Deerfield Palm
26.340180.0814
00383326.58RiverBeachBeach
SAJ-2013-MP N. Fork Oakland
26.180380.1372Broward
00376337.91Middle RiverPark
SAJ-2013-MP S. Fork Ft.
26.153180.1233Broward
00382338.52Middle RiverLauderdale
SAJ-2013-MP Miami-
Oleta River25.948480.1506Ojus
00381353.74Dade
Table 1
The Corps issued Regional General Permit, SAJ-14, verifications (33 C.F.R.
§325.5(c)(1)) to All Aboard Florida for the installation of fiber optic cable using
directional drilling at nine (9) separate and distinct locations within Phase II (D-08
segment) of the Projectarea on October 14, 2015. The Corps later determined the
work authorized by the Regional General Permit Verifications do not have independent
utility and are a component of the Phase II Project. The Corps rescinded the Regional
General Permit verifications dated October 14, 2015, and evaluated these actions as
part of the Standard Permit (33 C.F.R. §325.5(b)(1)) evaluation for the Project.
Because Phase I has independent utility from Phase II, the Corps’ scope of action is
limited to the geographic limits of Phase II of the Project.The Corps is not considering
the work proposed within Phase Ior within the geographic boundaries within Orlando
International Airport (OIA)in this evaluation. Work within OIAhas been previously
authorized under separate Department of the Army (DA) permits issued to Greater
Orlando Aviation Authority. The U.S. Coast Guard(Coast Guard)is the federal
regulatory agency responsible for approving the locations andplans forbridges over
navigable waters of the United States.
As the initial lead federal agency for National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)
compliance, FRA was responsible for fulfilling the collective responsibilities under
Section 106 (36 C.F.R. Part 800). As part of the FEIS, FRA 1) defined the Project as
an “Undertaking” pursuant to 36 C.F.R. § 800.16; 2) defined an Area of Potential
Effects (APE) for the undertaking; 3)identified historic propertieswithin the APE;4)
assessed adverse effects;and 5) attempted to resolve adverse effects.
2
June 1, 2017
The identified historic properties within this APE are documented in the Cultural
Resources Assessment Reports (CRAR)dated September 2013 and May 2015.
Florida State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO)concurred on November 20, 2013
(amended May 21, 2015) that the properties identified in the CRAR and in the All
Aboard Florida –Orlando to West Palm Beach, Florida Intercity Passenger Rail Project
–Phase II Determination of Effects Report, Tables 1 through 8 (Attachment 1 to this
PA) are listed in and/or eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places
(NRHP).By letter dated December 29, 2015, SHPO provided an updated
determination document concluding that they concur with FRA’s findingthat the
proposed undertaking will have an effect, but not an adverse effect,on the FECR
Linear Resource Group;andthat the ground disturbing activities associated with
construction have the potential to cause adverse effects to National Register-eligible
archaeological sites.Conditioned upon the successful completion of the
Programmatic Agreement(PA)and the implementation of thearchaeological
monitoring planoutlinedin this PA,SHPOconcurredwith FRA’s determination of “no
adverse effect” tothese archaeological sites.
By letter dated June 27, 2016, FRA informed the Corps and Coast Guardthat it is not
making a decision on AAF’s Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing
application at this time. FRA also concluded it is not executing the draft Programmatic
Agreement (PA) developed June 24, 2016 in consultation withthe Advisory Council on
Historic Preservation (ACHP);Broward County; City of Stuart; City of Vero Beach;
Indian River County; Indian River County Historical Society Inc.;Martin County; Old
Vero Ice Age Sites Committee; St. Lucie County; and Town of St. Lucie Villagefor the
undertaking.
By letter dated November 15, 2016, the Corps coordinated a secondaddendum,dated
November 2016,to the Cultural Resources Assessment Reportwith SHPO. The
CRARaddendum included: 1)a previously inaccessible private property parcel; 2) the
revised footprint for the Cocoa Curve;and 3) various ponds and drainage features
which were not evaluated in the original CRAR, by the FRA or SHPO. The Corps
determined that no effect to historic properties are likely within the second addendum
APEand no further survey work is required. By letter dated November 30, 2016,
SHPO concurredwith the determination made by the Corps that no historicproperties
are located in the areas surveyed in the second addendum and the proposed
undertakingwill have no effect on historic propertieswithin the addendum’s APE.
The Corps hasindependently evaluated and adopts the consultations completed
between FRA, SHPO, and ACHP in accordance with 33 C.F.R. § 325 Appendix C
Paragraph 2(c) and 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2).In accordance with the procedures at 33
C.F.R. § 325 Appendix C(1)(g) the Corps’Regulatory Program defines permit area as
thoseareas comprising water of the United States that will be directly and/or indirectly
affected by the proposed undertaking. For the Phase II undertaking, the Corps has
determined there is enough federal control to expand the permit area to align with the
APE as previously defined by FRA.TheCoast Guardhasindependently evaluated
3
June 1, 2017
and adoptedthe bridge-related consultations completed between FRA, SHPO, and
ACHP in accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(a)(2).
After considering comments received from the consulting parties and completing field
assessments, the Corps has determined there are five (5) distinct archaeological sites
within Phase II, North-South Corridor Area of Potential Effect (APE) for direct effects
which were not documented in AAF’s Cultural Resource Assessment Report or FRA’s
Determination of Effect. The sites have been coordinated with SHPO by letter dated
May 2, 2017 and the sitesare incorporated into Stipulation IV below andhave been
added to Table 8 of Attachment 1.
Therefore, the Corps and Coast Guard will execute this PA.
Basis for Agreement
The parties acknowledge the following basis for agreement:
WHEREAS, All Aboard Florida proposes to construct and operate the All Aboard
Florida Intercity Rail Project Phase II, which would involve the institution of intercity
passenger rail service between Orlando and West Palm Beach, Florida; and
WHEREAS, the Commandant, U.S.Coast Guard, is responsible for issuing Coast
Guard Bridge Permits for the construction, replacement, or modification of bridges
over thenavigable waters of the United States pursuant to 33 C.F.R. Subchapter J;
and
WHEREAS, the Jacksonville District of the Corps has received an application for a DA
permit pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. § 1344) (CWA)
and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. § 403)(RHA);
and
WHEREAS,the Corps and the Coast Guard havedetermined the undertakingmay
directly and adversely affect designated historic properties and the Corps’ public
interest review requirements contained in 33 C.F.R. § 320.4; and
WHEREAS, the Corps has determined there is sufficient Federal control and
responsibility to extend the Corps’ scope of analysis to entirety of Phase II of the
undertakingwith the exception of bridges over navigable waters of the United
States, for which the Coast Guard will remain the responsible Federal agency.
Activities associatedwith the undertakingoutside the waters of the United States
within the Phase II APE are included in the permit area, because all of the
following tests are satisfied: Such activities would not occur but for the
authorization of the work or structures within the waters of the United States; such
activities are integrally related to the work or structures that would be authorized
within waters of the United States; the work or structures that would be authorized
are essential to the completeness of the overall undertaking; and such activities
are directly associated with the work or structures to be authorized; and
4
June 1, 2017
WHEREAS, the undertakingwould require certainpermitsfrom the Corps and the
Coast Guard, the Corps and Coast Guardare complying with the their applicable
regulations implementing Section 106 (36 C.F.R. Part 800) which require that the
Corps and Coast Guardtake into account the effects of the undertakingon
properties listed inor eligible for inclusion inthe NRHP,and the Corps and Coast
Guardhave independently evaluated and adopted the Project Phase II
consultations completed between FRA, SHPO, and ACHP datedNovember 20,
2013 (amended May 21, 2015); and
WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guardhave consulted with the Florida Division of
Historical Resources (FDHR), which is the SHPO, under 36 C.F.R. § 800.2(c)(1);
and
WHEREAS, the construction of the undertakingwill involve the following: (1) the
removal and replacement of the Eau Gallie River Bridge (Florida Master Site File
Number 8BR3058) and St. Sebastian River Bridge (Florida Master Site File
Numbers 8BR3062/8IR1569), which are individually eligible for listing in the NRHP;
(2) rehabilitation or replacement of historic bridges contributing to the Florida East
Coast Railway (FECR) Historic District; and (3) ground-disturbing activities,
including installation or relocation of signal and communication systems, relocation
of buried fiber optic cable, and track reconstruction within the existing FECR right
of way; and
WHEREAS, through consultation SHPO has concurred on December 29, 2015 with
FRA’s determination that the undertakingwill have an adverse effect on the Eau
Gallie River Bridge, St. Sebastian River Bridge, and the ground disturbing activities
associated with construction have the potential to cause adverse effects to
National Register-eligible archaeological sites under 36 C.F.R. § 800.5(a)(2)(i)
through demolition; and
WHEREAS, through consultation FRA has determined, and SHPO has concurred, that
the undertakingwill not have an adverse effect to the other NRHP-listed or eligible
properties in Attachment 1 either throughdemolition, alteration, change in the
character of the property’s setting, or the introduction of visible, atmospheric, or
auditory elements under 36 C.F.R. § 800.5(a)(2)(ii) through (v); and
WHEREAS, through consultation, the SHPO has concurred on December 29, 2015
with FRA’s determination that the ground-disturbing activities associated with
construction, performed consistent with the Archaeological Monitoring Plan in
StipulationIV, should not havean adverse effect on archaeological sites; and
WHEREAS, the FRA notified the ACHP on April 24, 2015,of the adverse effect and
ACHP agreed to participate in the Section 106 consultation; and
WHEREAS, FRA initiated the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process for
the undertakingin April 2013 and involved the public at five scoping meetings in
5
June 1, 2017
May 2013 held in Orlando, Miami, West Palm Beach, Fort Pierce, and Fort
Lauderdale before the publication of the Draft Environmental Impact Statement
(DEIS) for the undertaking; and eight public meetings during the public comment
period on the DEIS in October and November 2014 held in accordance with NEPA
along the undertakingcorridor, where Section 106 considerations (including
identification of and potential adverse effects to historic properties) were presented
to the public and locally affected parties; and
WHEREAS, on August 4, 2015,FRA published a Final EIS (FEIS) which included as
an attachment a draft Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) thatwill besuperseded
and replaced by this PA; and
WHEREAS, FRA engaged in government-to-government consultation with the
Miccosukee Tribe of Indians of Florida, the Muscogee Creek Nation, the Poarch
Band of Creek Indians, the Seminole Nation of Oklahoma and the Seminole Tribe
of Florida regarding the undertaking.Of these, the Tribal Historic Preservation
Officer of the Seminole Tribe of Florida has consulted with FRA and has requested
that FRA continue government-to-government consultation concerning
archaeological sites. The Corps continues to engage in government-to-
government consultation with the Tribal Historic Preservation Officerfor the
Seminole Tribe of Florida; and
WHEREAS, FRA identifiedand contacted local governments and other entities to
participate inthe Section 106 process as Consulting Partiesunder 36 C.F.R. §
800.2(c)(3) and (c)(5) on May 19, 2015, and nine entities responded with their
intent to participate (Broward County, June 9, 2015; City of Stuart, June 9, 2015;
City of Vero Beach, June 4, 2015; Indian River County, June 10, 2015); Indian
River County Historical Society Inc., June 6, 2015; Martin County, June 12, 2015;
Old Vero Ice Age Sites Committee, June 2, 2015; St. Lucie County, June 12, 2015;
and Town of St. Lucie Village, June 12, 2015); and
WHEREAS, FRA has consulted with the Consulting Parties and provided the
Consulting Parties a draft Determination of Effects (DOE) Report on May 19, 2015,
and a revised draft DOE Report, draft Memorandum of Agreement, and draft
Archaeological Monitoring Plan on October 5, 2015, and held a meeting on
October 19, 2015,concerning the identification of historic properties within the APE
for direct and indirect effects and concerning FRA’s determination of effects to
those historic properties; and
WHEREAS, FRA, Corps, and Coast Guardreceived comments from the public and
consulting parties regarding the potential effects of the undertakingon historic
propertiesandaddressed the comments through development of this PA; and
WHEREAS, AAF has committed to use alternative construction methods such as
extended directional drilling to avoid adverse effects to known sites and areas of
archaeological sensitivity within the APEidentified in Stipulation IV; and
6
June 1, 2017
WHEREAS, the FRA, Corps,andCoast Guardhave considered the Consulting
Parties’ comments on the identification of historic properties within APEand on
FRA’s Determination of Effects to those historic properties and determined that all
historic properties within the APE, respectively,have been identified consistent
with Section 106 and its implementing regulations for Protection of Historic
Properties (36 C.F.R. Part 800)and in compliance with thedata analysis and
reporting standards embodied in FDHR‘s Cultural Resource Management (CRM)
Standards and Operational Manual (Florida Department of State 2002), and
Chapter 1A 46 (Archaeological and Historical Report Standards and Guidelines),
Florida Administrative Code, and to professional guidelines set forth in the
Secretary of Interior’s Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic
Preservation (48 FR 44716, as amended);and
WHEREAS,the Corps published a public noticeJanuary 10, 2017, advising the Corps
and Coast Guard will execute a PA; and
WHEREAS,the Corps and Coast Guardhave coordinated a draftPA with the
Signatories,and the Consulting Parties by letterdatedJanuary 11, 2017; and
WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guard held a meeting on February 9, 2017,with the
consulting partiesconcerning the draft PA; and
WHEREAS,the Corps completed field assessmentsat known archaeological sites and
important archaeological areaswith representatives of the consulting parties in
Indian River and St. Lucie Counties onMarch 6 and 7, 2017,at the request of the
consulting parties; and
WHEREAS, the Corps and Coast Guardamended the PA as a result of the comments
receivedfrom the consulting partiesand field visits completed by the Corps; and
NOW THEREFORE,the Signatories agree that the undertakingshall be implemented
in accordance with the following stipulations to take into account the effectsof the
undertakingon the historic properties listed in Attachment 1.
STIPULATIONS
The Corps and Coast Guard, in coordination with AAF, will ensure that the following
measures are carried out:
I.APPLICABILITY
A.This PA does not apply to elements of the undertakinginvolving Positive Train Control
(PTC) infrastructure covered by ACHP’s Program Comment for Positive Train Control
Wayside Poles and Infrastructure(May 16, 2014).
B.This PA does not apply to elements of the undertakinginvolving the construction of new
communications towers or the collocation of equipment on existing towers that are
7
June 1, 2017
covered by ACHP’s Program Comment to Avoid Duplicative Reviews for Wireless
Communications Facilities Construction and Modification(September 24, 2015).
C.This PA does not apply to Phase I of All Aboard Florida’s Intercity Passenger Rail
Project from West Palm Beach to Miami, Florida.
II.STANDARDS AND PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS
A.All architectural history work or archaeological work carried out under this PA will be
conducted by, or under the direct supervision of, a person or persons meeting the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Architectural History
(48 FR 44738-9) and the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for Archaeology (48 FR 44738-9).
B.The Signatories acknowledge that the Corps is the federal agency responsible for
coordinating any and all aspects of this PA with the Native American Tribes. AAF shall
not contact the Native American Tribes regarding any aspect of this PA.
C.The Signatories acknowledge that Native American Tribes possess special expertise in
assessing the eligibility of historic properties that may possess religious and cultural
significance to them.
III.BRIDGE REPLACEMENT, REHABILITATION, AND CONSTRUCTION
A.Bridges Advisory Group
i.The Coast Guardis the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation
III.
ii.A Bridges Advisory Group will be formed by AAF. The purpose of the Bridges
Advisory Group is to review the proposed design of the new replacement bridgesat
Eau Gallie River and St. Sebastian Riverand rehabilitation of existing bridges listed
in stipulation III.A.IV that are contributing elements to the FECR Historic District and
make recommendations to AAF to assist AAF in developing bridge designs
consistent with the character of the FECR Historic District. A preliminary navigation
clearance determination will be issued by the Coast Guard prior to proposing bridge
designsfor review by the Bridges Advisory Group.
iii.The Bridges Advisory Group willseek input from interested parties on the design of
the replacement of the Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian River Bridge and
the design for the rehabilitation or replacement of historic bridges contributing to the
FECR Historic District.
iv.The Bridges Advisory Group will consist of AAF, SHPO, the Independent
Archeological Monitor described in Stipulation IV.B, and any Consulting Party that
expresses an interest in participating and that is situated in the localities where the
bridge work will occur.Consulting Parties must notify AAF of their interest in
8
June 1, 2017
participating in the Bridges Advisory Group in writing within 15business days of
receiving notification from AAF that the PA has been executed.Any Consulting
Party participating on the Bridges Advisory Group may provide written comments to
AAF, Coast Guard, and SHPO only on the design of bridges listed below located in
the county or city with which they are affiliated.
The Eau Gallie River Bridge is located in Brevard County and the City of Melbourne;
the St. Sebastian River Bridge is located in Brevard and Indian River Counties and
immediately north of the City of Sebastian. Historic bridges contributing to the FECR
Historic District that will be demolished and replaced include:
Crane Creek Bridge (Brevard County)
Turkey Creek Bridge (Brevard County)
Goat Creek Bridge (Brevard County)
Rio Waterway Bridge (Martin County)
Salerno Waterway Bridge (Martin County)
Manatee Creek Tributary 1 Bridge (Martin County)
Manatee Creek Tributary 2 Bridge (Martin County)
Historic bridges contributing to the FECR Historic District that will be rehabilitated
include:
Taylor Creek (St. Lucie County)
St. Lucie River (Martin County)
Loxahatchee River (Palm Beach County)
v.AAF will provide design plans to the Bridges Advisory Group, Coast Guard, and
SHPO for review at the 60 percent design stage for each bridge identified in
Stipulation III.A.ii. The Bridges Advisory Group will have 30business days to review
the design plans and provide recommendations to AAF, SHPO, and Coast Guard.
AAF and SHPO will meet as needed to review the recommendations of the Bridges
Advisory Group. The recommendations of the Bridges Advisory Group are advisory
only. AAF is responsible for ensuring that the structural and engineering design of
these bridges meets engineering standards for passenger and freight railroads at the
specified loadings. In addition, AAF will take into account any recommendationsin
accordance with this paragraph in preparing the final designs for the bridges and will
choose and implement designs for the bridges that are compatible with the character
of the historic districts where they are located.The Coast Guard will review the final
designs for the bridges to confirm that the recommendations have been taken into
account and the final design meetsrequirements of the General Bridge Act of 1946.
B.Documentation for the Historic Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian River Bridge
i.Prior to the demolition of the historic Eau Gallie River Bridge and St. Sebastian
River Bridge, AAF will prepare the following documentation of these bridges in
accordance with Historic American Engineering Record (HAER) standards:
9
June 1, 2017
Drawings –Select drawings of both of the existing bridge plans, as available,
scanned and provided in an acceptable digital format (i.e. jpeg files);
Photographs –Photographs with large-format negatives of context and views
from all sides of the bridges and approaches, roadway and deck views, and
noteworthy features and details. All negatives and prints will be processed to
meet archival standards. One photograph of a principal elevation shall include
a scale; and
Written Data –Reports with narrative description of both bridges, summary of
significance, and historical context.
ii.AAF will provide copies of the documentation completed in accordance with
Stipulation III.B.ias follows:
An archival copy of documentation for both bridges to the U.S. Department of
Interior (DOI), National Park Service Southeast Regional Office for review and
approval before demolition of the structure, per HAER guidelines; and
An archival copy of the DOI-approved documentation for both bridges to the
SHPO for inclusion in the Florida Master Site File (FMSF); and
A copy of the DOI-approved documentation for both bridges to the Florida
Historical Society in Cocoa, Florida, and copiesof the St. Sebastian River
Bridge documentation to Indian River County and the Indian River County
Historical Society in Vero Beach, Florida.
IV.ARCHAEOLOGICAL MONITORING AND UNANTICIPATED ARCHAEOLOGICAL
DISCOVERIES
A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation IV.
B.AAF agrees to submit plans and specification on the means and methods of construction
ofMain Canal (MP 226.8)and North Canal (MP 223.8)bridges prior to commencement
of construction on the bridges. The Corps will review the plans to ensure AAF has taken
all reasonable efforts to avoid and minimize ground disturbanceactivities at the canal
banks.The plans shall be submitted toU.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Regulatory
Division, P.O. Box 4970, Jacksonville, Florida 32926.Reference DA number SAJ-2012-
01564 in any correspondence transmitted.
C.AAF will use alternative construction methods such as horizontal directional drilling to
avoid adverse effects to known sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity within the APE
identified in Attachment 2. AAF agrees to monitor the entry and exit locations of the
horizontal directional drill asdescribedin Stipulation IV.Eand IV.F.If extended directional
drilling is not feasible due to physical constraints (e.g. existing utilities that could be
10
June 1, 2017
affected by drilling), then theIndependent Archaeological Monitor (see section IV.E
below))shall be implemented at these locations using the monitoring protocol in
stipulationsIV.E and IV.F.
D.This Stipulation is the Archaeological Monitoring/Unanticipated Discoveries Plan (Plan)
that AAF will implement during ground-disturbing construction activities of the
undertakingalong the corridor between West Palm Beach and Orlando that was
reviewed in FRA’s FEIS. These activities may include the reinstallation of a second
track, relocating a buried fiber optic cable line, installing subsurface signals and
communications systems, and other construction activities associated with the
undertaking.The Plan also establishes a process for identifying and protecting
unmarked human remains and identifyingarchaeological resources that may be
encountered during undertakingconstruction. AAF will implement the Plan in
accordance with state and Federal laws, including Florida laws Chapter 872 Offenses
Concerning Dead Bodies and Graves and Chapter 267 Historical Resources. The Plan
is applicable to the following known sites and areas of archaeological sensitivity:
Hobe Sound National Wildlife Refuge#3 Site (8MT1287);
Fort Capron Site (8SL41);
Vero Man/Vero Locality Site (8IRI/8IR9);
Fort Pierce (8SL31);
Fort Pierce Mound (8SL3)
Railroad Site (8IR846);
Avenue A-Downtown Fort Pierce (8SL1772)
Gifford Bones Site (8IR7);
SavannahNorth Dunes Site (8SL3063);
Pinecrest Colored Cemetery (8BR2808);
Cocoa Cemetery (BR1777);
City of Melbourne Cemetery;
Malabar Cemetery;
Sebastian River;
Fort Pierce Cemetery (8SL1101);
Eden Cemetery (8SL1634);
All Saints Cemetery (8MT1288);
St. Lucie River;
Hobe Sound AME Church Cemetery (8MT1290);
Loxahatchee River;
Evergreen Cemetery (8BP218);
Bridge demolition and construction locations; and
Those areas listed as high probability locations in the monitoringmapsincluded
asAttachment 2.
This Plan provides methods to avoid impacts to these sites and areas of archaeological
sensitivity during construction through the use of archaeological monitoring.
11
June 1, 2017
Implementation of the Plan will ensure that any deposits of archaeological materials are
identified, documented, and protected, or mitigated if impacts cannot be avoided.
E.Independent Archaeological Monitor
i.AAF will submit to the Corps for approval the qualifications of at least three
differentpersons meeting the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications
Standards for Archaeology (48 FR 44738-9) (Archaeologist). Noperson maybe
affiliated with the same company or organization as another person whose
qualifications are submitted.Once approved by the Corps, AAF will engage the
services of such person or persons to provide an independent review of the
archaeological monitoring undertaken as described in Stipulation IV.E., to be
known as the Independent Archaeological Monitor (IAM).The IAM will have
knowledge and experience in the archaeology of the undertakingarea (i.e., central
and eastern coastal Florida). The IAM will consult, as appropriate, with identified
professional archaeologists familiar with the sites and archaeologically sensitive
areas listed in Stipulation IV.D.(e.g., the Principal Investigator and/or Lead
Archaeologist at the Vero Man Site, and the Principle Investigator and/or Lead
Archaeologist at the Fort Pierce Mound Site) before initiating and during
archaeological monitoring activities. The IAM will provide sufficient qualified
personnel to monitor simultaneous construction at multiple locations.
ii.AAF will bear the costs incurred by the IAM. The IAM will function as an
Independent Third Party Contractor.The scope of work of the IAM will be
determined by the Corps.The Corps, AAF, and the IAM will enter into a
Memorandum of Understanding that is consistent with the terms of this PA and
details the scope of work and schedule at least30 calendar days priorto the start
of any ground-disturbing construction activities at the sites or archaeologically
sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.D.
iii.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be responsible for communication with the IAM.
For each site or archaeologicallysensitive area listed in Stipulation IV.D., AAF’s
Project Archaeologist will provide the IAM with reasonable notice in advance of any
ground-disturbing construction activities and will provide the IAM with a description
of the specific activities and anticipated construction schedule and duration. AAF
will ensure that the IAM has a reasonable opportunity to be present during all
ground disturbing and archaeological monitoring activities. The IAM will have
discretion to decide whether or not to be present.
iv.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will immediately notify the IAM of any archaeological
artifacts or features discovered during ground disturbing activities at the sites or
archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.D., or of any inadvertent
discoveries within the APE.The IAM will independently evaluate the find for Nand
provide a finding within 24 hours.
12
June 1, 2017
v.The IAM will review the Project Archaeologist logsdaily(Stipulation IV.E.iv) and
will review the Monitoring Report prepared by the Project Archaeologist for each
site and archaeologically sensitive areaslisted in Stipulation IV.D, and will provide
weekly written reports to the Corps and SHPO.
vi.The IAM will have the authority to stop work if he/she observes a circumstance
where any archaeological artifacts or features are at risk of damage or destruction
from work being performed at a site or archaeologically sensitive area listed in
Stipulation IV.D.AAF, the Corps,and SHPO willfollow Stipulations IV.F.iand
V.F.iibefore work can proceed.This stipulation shall be included in any contracts
associated with ground disturbing activities for the AAF project.
F.Monitoring Methods and Documentation
i.Personnel: AAF will engage the services of a person or persons meeting the
Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards for Archaeology
(48 FR 44738-9) (Project Archaeologist) to fulfill its obligations under this
Stipulation IV.AAF proposes to use Janus Research as the Project Archaeologist.
All archaeological monitoring will be conducted by, or under the direct supervision
of, the Project Archaeologistwith the exception of the IAM’s monitoring activities.
The Project Archaeologist will ensure that the archaeological monitors have the
education, training, and experience to properly monitor construction activities. The
Project Archaeologist will determine the appropriate number and placement of
monitors for each site dependent on subsurface conditions and the nature of the
construction activity. An archaeological monitor will be present for all ground
disturbing activities at the archaeological sites and areas of archaeological
sensitivity listed in IV.Dand represented on the mapsin Attachment 2.
ii.Construction Crew Education: Before the commencement of any ground disturbing
activities, AAF’s Project Archaeologist will brief a designated construction
supervisor on the monitoring goals and procedures, stop work procedures, the
stratificationin the project area, and applicable Federal, state, and local laws
pertaining to the discovery of human remains and archaeological materials. AAF’s
Project Archaeologist will show construction crew members involved in ground
disturbing activities study collections of midden soil, faunal remains, shell, bone,
and stone tools, lithic fragments, pottery sherds, and other types of artifacts that
could potentially be encountered at each of the archaeological sites and known
areas of archaeological sensitivity.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will also explain to
the construction crew members the stop work procedures they must follow if
archaeological materials are encountered.The stipulations in this section shall be
included in any contracts associated with ground disturbing activities for the AAF
project.
iii.Field Methods: AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be present to monitor all ground
disturbing activity at each site and archaeologically sensitive area listed in
Stipulation IV.D.AAF will inform a designatedconstruction crew supervisor that
13
June 1, 2017
the Project Archaeologistand/or IAMwill be present and has the authority to stop
or redirect work in the event of an unanticipated discovery.
iv.AAF’s Project Archaeologist will be responsible for the observation, collection, and
documentation of archaeological features or artifacts encountered during ground
disturbing activities. The documentation of archaeological features and artifacts
will include: (1) plotting their approximate locations on a map of the project area;
(2) writing a description of the resources encountered that includes their location,
size, approximate depth, type of material encountered, and any other pertinent
information; (3) drawing of profiles; and (4) taking photographs. The Project
Archaeologist will keep a daily log of construction and monitoring activities and
submit the logs to the IAM weekly.
v.Any artifacts collected during the course of monitoring will be bagged andrecorded
separately by AAF’s Project Archaeologist with the appropriate provenience
information noted on the field bags. Obvious features will be treated as separate
collection proveniences. The Project Archaeologist will assign all artifact and soil
sample bags Field Specimen numbers in the field. The Project Archaeologist will
also conduct laboratory processing, which will consist of the cleaning, inventorying,
packaging, and temporary storage of the artifacts recovered.Artifact analysis will
involve the morphological and techno-functional classification of artifacts and, if
possible, will establish their temporal/cultural affiliations. The Project Archaeologist
will make any artifacts available for inspection by the IAM.
vi.In the event of a findthatis potentially eligible for the NRHP, as recommendedby
AAF’s Project Archaeologist or the IAMin the field based on a preliminary
assessment, the following procedures will be followed:
AAF’s Project Archaeologist or the IAMwill stop/redirect all work within 100
feet of the find, and flag and secure the find. The Project Archaeologistor IAM
will immediately notify the construction supervisor, AAF, and the IAMor
Project Archaeologistof the find.The IAM will independentlyevaluate the find
forrecommendations oneligibilityfor inclusion in theNRHP.
If the Project Archaeologist recommendsand the IAM concurs that the find is
NRHP-potentially eligible, AAF will consult with the Corpsand SHPOto
develop appropriate treatment measures, if necessary. The Corps will share
the proposed treatment measures withthe Native American Tribes andany
Consulting Parties located within the jurisdiction of the find. Such Consulting
Parties will have seven(7)calendar days to review and provide written
comments to the Corps, SHPO and AAF on any such treatment measures
starting from the date on which the Corps contacts the Consulting Parties.
If the Project Archaeologist orIAM recommendsthat the find is eligible or
potentially eligible for NRHP listing and the sitemay be damaged by allowing
the ground disturbing activities to continue, AAF will cease all such activities
within 100feet of the find until consultation has been completed between the
14
June 1, 2017
Corps, AAF, SHPO, and until the Consulting Partieslocated within the
jurisdiction of the findhave been given seven (7)calendar days to review and
provide written comments to SHPO, Corps,and AAF. At the conclusion of the
commentperiod, the Corps will provide a DOEbased upon the information
submitted and a final treatment for the resource property will be developed.
The treatment plan must be carried out prior to re-commencement of ground
disturbing activities within 100 feet of the find.AAFwillprovide the funds for
such treatment.
vii.Curation: AAF agrees that Janus Research will provide temporary storage and
curation of all archaeological material (artifacts, ecofacts, etc.) and related
documentation recovered during the course of monitoring.Collected
archaeological material will becurated to professional standards and transferred to
AAF at the completion of the undertaking.AAF will consult withSHPO, Corps, and
Consulting Parties regarding the appropriate transfer or disposition of any artifacts
andrecords, including possible transfer to an appropriate Native American Tribe or
other entity.Prior to transferofownership of the collection to a Native American
Tribe or other entity, AAF must ensure that the recovered artifacts and related
records will be curated in a suitable repository as agreed to by SHPO and affected
Native American Tribe(s) and that applicable Florida state or Tribal guidelinesare
followed.
viii.Analysis and Report/Documentation: The Project Archaeologist will present the
results of the archaeological monitoring to the IAM, AAF, the Corps, SHPO and
any affected Native American Tribes in a Monitoring Report addressing methods,
findings, daily logs, and photographs of monitoring operations, at the conclusion of
ground disturbing activities at each archaeological siteand area of archaeological
sensitivity.The Monitoring Report will be submitted within thirty (30)calendar days
of the conclusion of ground-disturbing activities. The Project Archaeologist will
complete a FMSF Archaeological Site Form (available at
http://dos.myflorida.com/historical/preservation/master-site-file/documents-forms/)
for any archaeological sites identified during the monitoring.
G.Resolution of Disputes between Project Archaeologist and IAM
i.In the event of a dispute between the IAM and the Project Archaeologist
concerning the NRHP eligibilityof an archaeological discovery, or the need to stop
construction on a temporary basis as a result of a recommended potentially NRHP
eligiblefind under Stipulation IV.F.vii, the Project Archaeologist will notify AAF and
the IAM will notify the Corps, Coast Guard,and SHPO.
ii.If the dispute concerns the need to temporarily stop construction at a specific
archaeological monitoring location, AAF will cease ground disturbing activities at
that site or archaeologically sensitive area until the Corps, Coast Guard, and
SHPO have consulted and concurred on any measures to address the
archaeological discovery. The Corps, Coast Guard, and SHPO will conclude their
15
June 1, 2017
consultation on the treatment measures within fourteen (14)calendar days and
work will resume in accordance with the resolution of the consultation.
iii.In the event of a dispute concerning an archaeological discovery which is potential
eligibility for NRHP that does not require that construction be temporarily stopped,
the IAM will provide a written evaluation and recommendations to the Corps, Coast
Guard, and SHPO. The Corps and Coast Guard will consult with SHPO. The
SHPO will provide the Corps and Coast Guard with a recommendation, and the
Corps and Coast Guard will take the recommendation into account in reaching a
final decision regarding the dispute
iii.If AAF or SHPO disagree with the Corps and Coast Guarddecision, either party
may trigger the dispute resolution procedures in Stipulation IX.
V. AVOIDANCE OF ADDITIONAL POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS
A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation V.
B.If AAF proposes to use private property or property outside of the APEfor direct effects
for work site ingress/egress, materials staging, or construction, AAF will consult with
SHPO, the Corps, and Consulting Parties located within the jurisdiction of the proposed
work area(s) to assess the potential effects of new activities on archaeological and
historic resources and will locate such activities in such a manner as to avoid effects to
known historic properties listed or eligible for listing on the NRHP, including sites listed in
Stipulation IV.B.
C.If archaeological or historical resources are discovered during ground disturbing
activities within the APEor areas that are not listed in Stipulation IV.C, all ground
disturbing activities will cease and the Project Archeologist and IAM will be immediately
contacted. The archaeological monitors will then follow the procedures outlined in
Stipulation IV.E.
D.AAF will also consider any cumulative and indirecteffects to historic properties that may
occur as a result of such new activities described in Stipulation V.B.
E.AAF will use alternative construction methods such as vibratory or sonic pile driving to
reduce the vibration impact from pile/sheet piledriving when within 135 feet from
archaeological sitesand historic districts identified in Stipulation IV.D.
F.AAF will provide construction crew education, as described in Stipulation IV.F.ii, prior to
the commencement of any ground disturbing activitiesof theundertaking.
VI. HISTORIC INTERPRETATION WEBSITE
A.The Corps is the federal agency responsible for implementation of Stipulation VI.
B.AAF will develop and host a website that will focus and highlight the contributions of
Henry Morrison Flagler and the history of the FECR and its passenger rail service along
the corridor.The website must also provide a background describing the prehistoric and
16
June 1, 2017
historic context of the corridor. AAF will consult with SHPO during the development of
the website.
C.Beforelaunching the website, AAF will meet with SHPO and demonstrate the website
content to ensure that all historic information is accurate and consistent with historic
records.
D.The website will be available for public access for a minimum of five (5) years from the
start of revenue service by AAF or subsequent operator.
E.AAF will provide a link on its website to the historic website to enable both interested
passengers and the general public with access to the historic information.
VII. REPORTING
At least every two months, AAF’s public information officer willholda telephone
conference with Consulting Parties, public officialsand other interested community
representatives and public officials to provide a status report on the implementation of
the undertaking.This obligation will continue until completion of the undertaking. AAF
will also maintain a public website providing periodic updates on the undertaking’s
implementation.AAF will notify Consulting Parties in writing seven (7) calendar days
prior to commencing construction in proximity to properties listed on or eligible for
inclusion inthe NRHP (Attachment 1 to this PA),the archaeological sites,and
archaeologically sensitive areas listed in Stipulation IV.D.
VIII.POST REVIEW DISCOVERIES
A.Human Remains.In the case of an unanticipated discovery of human remains or burials
during construction activities, AAF shall halt construction in the immediate area (within
50feet) of the discovery, secure the area, and follow the provisions of the State of
Florida’s burial laws as set forth in Section 872.05 of Florida Statues.
B.Historic Properties. Historic Properties. In the event the Undertakinghas an
unanticipated adverse effect on above-or below-ground historic properties, AAF will
consult with the Corps, USCG, SHPO, and/or ACHPaccordance with 36 C.F.R. §
800.13(b).
IX.OBJECTIONS BY SIGNATORIES
A.Should any Signatory object in writing to the Corps or Coast Guardregarding any action
proposed or carried out with respect to the undertaking or implementation of this PA,
the Corps and Coast Guardwill consult with the objecting party to resolve the objection.
B.If after initiating such consultation with the objecting party the Corps and Coast Guard
determine that the objection cannot be resolved, the Corps and Coast Guardwill
forward all documentation relevant to the objection to the ACHP, including the Corps’
and the Coast Guard’sproposed response to the objection and request that the ACHP
comment on the proposed resolution within 30calendar days of receipt. Within 30
calendar days after receipt of all pertinent documentation, ACHP will:
17
June 1, 2017
i.Concur in the Corps andCoast Guardproposed resolution; or
ii.Provide the Corps and Coast Guard with recommendations, which the agencies will
take into account in reaching a final decision regarding the dispute; ornotify the
Corps and Coast Guard that it will comment under 36 C.F.R. Part 800, and proceed
to refer the objection and comment.Any ACHP comment provided in response to
such a request will be taken into account by the Corpsand Coast Guard in
accordance with 36 C.F.R. § 800.7(c)(4) with reference to the subject of the dispute.
C.Should ACHP not respond within 30days of receiving adequate documentation, the
Corps and Coast Guardmay make a final decision on the dispute and proceed
accordingly.
D.Any recommendations or comments provided by ACHP will be understood to pertain
only to the subject of the dispute; The Corps’,Coast Guard’s, and AAF’s responsibility to
carry out all other terms of this PA that are not the subject of the dispute will remain
unchanged.
X. OBJECTIONS BY THE PUBLIC
If a member of the public believes that this PA is not being implemented according to its
terms, that person may provide the Corps and Coast Guardwith written notice specifying
their concerns. The Corps andCoast Guardwill consider those concerns and may
consult with the member of the public, consulting parties, or other Signatories, as the
Corps and Coast Guarddeem appropriate. The Corps and Coast Guardwill respond to
the member of the public in writingand copy Signatories on its response.
XI.AMENDMENTS
Any Signatory to this PA may request that it be amended, whereupon the signatory
parties will consult in accordance with 36C.F.R. Part 800.6 to consider theamendment.
The Corps and Coast Guardwill consult, as appropriate based on the nature of the
proposed amendment, with Consulting Parties regarding amendments to this PA. All
signatoriesmust signify their acceptance of the proposed changes in writing within thirty
(30)days of their receipt.This PA shall only be amended by a written instrument
executed by all signatories.The amendment will be effective on the date of signature of
the last party to sign the amendment. When no consensus can be reached, the PA will
not be amended and the dispute resolution process set forth in Stipulation IXwill be
followed.
XII.TERMINATION
Any of the Signatories may terminate this PA by providing written notice to the other
parties, provided that the parties will consult during the period before termination to seek
agreement on amendments or other actions that mayavoid termination. Termination of
this PA must be in compliance with 36 C.F.R. Part 800. This PA may be terminated by
the execution of a subsequent Agreement that explicitly terminates or supersedes the
terms of the PA.
18
June 1, 2017
XIII.DURATION
Unless terminated under Stipulation XIIabove, this PA will be in effect for ten (10)years
following execution by all signatoriesor until the signatories determinethe termsof the
PA aresatisfactorily fulfilled, whichever is later. This PA will also be terminated if AAF
notifies the Signatories in writing that it is unable or has decided not to construct the
undertaking.
Execution of this PA by the Corps, Coast Guard, SHPO, AAF and ACHP, and
implementation of its terms, demonstratesthat the FRA, Corps,andCoast Guardhave
taken into account the effects of the undertakingon historic properties.
19
June 1, 2017
PROGRAMMATIC AGREEMENT AMONG
U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS, U.S. COAST GUARD, THE FLORIDA STATE
HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, ALL ABOARD FLORIDA –OPERATIONS,
LLC, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING
COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 106 OF THE NATIONAL HISTORIC PRESERVATION
ACT FOR THE ALL ABOARD FLORIDA INTERCITY PASSENGER RAIL PROJECT
PHASE II ORLANDO TO WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA
Signatures
________________________Date:
JASON A. KIRK, P.E.
Colonel, U.S. Army
District Commander
________________________Date:
S.A. BUSCHMAN
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard
Seventh Coast Guard District
________________________Date:
John M. Fowler
Executive Director
Advisory Council for Historic Preservation
________________________Date:
Timothy Parsons, Ph.D., RPA
Division of Historical Resources &
State Historic Preservation Officer
________________________Date:
P. Michael Reiniger
President
All Aboard Florida, Operations, LLC
20
June 1, 2017
ATTACHMENT 1: PROPERTIES LISTED IN OR ELIGIBLE FOR THE
NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES, AND DETERMINATIONS
OF EFFECT FINDINGS
1
Table 1Historic Linear Resources Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects
National
Register Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressResource TypeStatusof Effect
8BR1870/ 8IR1497/ 8IR1518/ 8SL3014/ Florida East Coast RailwayLinear ResourceNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
MT1391/ 8MT1450/ 8PB12102Effect
1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed
properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices(online).
Table 2FECR Historic Bridges Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects
National
Mile
Date Register Determination
PostEstimateStatusof Effect
CountyFMSF #Site Name / Address
190.47Brevard8BR3058Fixed Railway Bridge over the Eau Gallie 1925Eligible as Adverse Effect
River –SteelFECR
Contributing
Resource/
Individually
Eligible
194.34Brevard8BR3059Fixed Railway Bridge over the Crane 1925Eligible as No Adverse
Creek and Melbourne Street –SteelEffect
FECR
Contributing
Resource
197.7Brevard8BR3060Fixed Railway Bridge over the Turkey 1925Eligible as No Adverse
Creek –SteelFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
202.59Brevard8BR3061Fixed Railway Bridge over the Goat 1959Eligible as No Adverse
Creek –SteelFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
212.07Brevard and 8BR3062/Fixed Railway Bridge over the Sebastian 1926Eligible as Adverse Effect
River –Steel
Indian River8IR1569FECR
Contributing
Resource/
Individually
Eligible
240.1St. Lucie8SL3191Fixed Bridge over the Taylor Creek -1961Eligible as No Adverse
Concrete with Steel Beam SpanFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
21
June 1, 2017
Table 2FECR Historic Bridges Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Direct Effects
National
Mile Date Determination
Register
PostEstimateStatusof Effect
CountyFMSF #Site Name / Address
259.95Martin8MT1623Fixed Bridge over the Rio Waterway -1958Eligible as No Adverse
Steel and Timber PilesFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
260.93Martin8MT1382Movable Bridge over the St. Lucie River –1938Eligible as No Adverse
Effect
SteelFECR
Contributing
Resource/
Individually
Eligible
266.86Martin8MT1624Fixed Bridge over the Salerno Waterway -1958Eligibleas No Adverse
Steel and Timber PilesFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
267.34Martin8MT1625Fixed Bridge over the Tributary to Manatee 1962Eligible as No Adverse
Creek 1 -Steel and Timber PilesEffect
FECR
Contributing
Resource
267.70Martin8MT1626Fixed Bridge over the Tributary to Manatee 1962Eligible as No Adverse
Creek 2 -Steel and Timber PilesFECR Effect
Contributing
Resource
282.58Palm Beach8PB16041Movable Bridge over the Loxahatchee 1935Eligible as No Adverse
River –SteelEffect
FECR
Contributing
Resource/
Individually
Eligible
1
Table 3Brevard County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects
Resource National
TypeConstructRegister Determination of
ion DateStatusEffect
FMSF #Site Name / AddressStyle
8IR2173Union Cypress Saw Mill Historic Mixed NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect
DistrictDistrict
8BR215Florida Power & Light Co. Ice Plant / Building1926Industrial NRHP–ListedNo Adverse Effect
1604 S, Harbor City BoulevardVernacular
8BR759Building1930NRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect
Marion S. Whaley Citrus Packing Frame
House/ 2275 Rockledge Blvd W.Vernacular
8BR1163Buildingc. 1917NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect
Mattie Lamar House/ 361 Stone Frame
StreetVernacular
22
June 1, 2017
1
Table 3Brevard County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects
Resource National
TypeConstructRegister Determination of
ion DateStatusEffect
FMSF #Site Name / AddressStyle
8BR1710Jorgensen's General Store/5390 US Building1894Frame NRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect
Hwy 1Vernacular
8BR1723Buildingc. 1931NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect
Cocoa Cemetery Storage Building/Masonry
101 N. Cocoa Blvd.Vernacular
8BR1739Buildingc. 1932Tudor RevivalNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect
Ashley's Cafe & Lounge/
1609 Rockledge Blvd. W.
8BR1741Rockledge Gardens Nursery & Buildingc. 1930Industrial NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
Landscaping/2153 Rockledge Blvd. VernacularEffect
W.
8BR1765Buildingc. 1927NRHP-Eligible
Bohn Equipment Company/ Industrial No Adverse
255Olive StVernacularEffect
8BR2779317 Rosa Jones DriveFECR c. 1962InternationalNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
StationEffect
8BR1724Hilltop CemeteryCemeteryc. 1887NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
Effect
8BR1777Cocoa CemeteryCemeteryc. 1890NRHP-Eligible
No Adverse
Effect
1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places.
1
Table 4Indian River County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects
Resource Construction National Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleRegister Statusof Effect
8IR859McKee Jungle GardensResource NRHP-ListedNo Adverse
GroupEffect
8IR1519Dixie HighwayNRHP-Eligible
Linear No Adverse
ResourceEffect
th
8IR681903NRHP-Listed
Vero Railroad Station/ 2336 14FECR Frame No Adverse
AvenueStationVernacularEffect
8IR99Building1908NRHP-Eligible
George Armstrong Braddock House/ Georgian No Adverse
1309 Louisiana AvenueRevivalEffect
8IR100Baughman House/ 1525 North Building1900Neo-Classical NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
Louisiana AvenueRevivalEffect
8IR3885056 North Old Dixie HighwayBuildingc. 1920BungalowNRHP-Eligible
No Adverse
Effect
8IR624Building1935Frame NRHP-ListedNo Adverse
Old Vero Beach Community
th
AvenueVernacularEffect
Building/ 2146 14
8IR858Hall of Giants, McKee Jungle Building1940OtherNRHP-Eligible No Adverse
th
Gardens/ US 1 and 4Street(individually and Effect
contributing to
district)
23
June 1, 2017
1
Table 4Indian River County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect Effects
Resource Construction National Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleRegister Statusof Effect
8IR975Building1926NRHP-Listed
Vero Beach Diesel Power Plant/ Masonry No Adverse
th
1133 19PlaceVernacularEffect
8IR1464Building1966ModernNRHP-Eligible
Vero Beach Community Center/ No Adverse
th
AvenueEffect
2266 14
st
8IR14751146 21StreetBuilding1966ModernNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
Effect
1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed
properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online).
Table 5St. Lucie County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect
1
Effects
Resource National
TypeConstruction Register Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressDateStyleStatusof Effect
8SL2801Edgar Town Historic DistrictHistoric NRHP-
No Adverse
DistrictEligible (also Effect
local
designation)
8SL76St. Lucie Historic DistrictHistoric NRHP-No Adverse
DistrictListedEffect
8SL78Fairmont Manor/ 5707 South Building1896Neo-NRHP-No Adverse
Indian River DriveClassical EligibleEffect
Revival
8SL2209015 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1890Frame NRHP-No Adverse
VernacularEligibleEffect
8SL2277901 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1910CraftsmanNRHP-No Adverse
EligibleEffect
8SL2296109 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1915Colonial NRHP-No Adverse
RevivalEligibleEffect
8SL2315703 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1915Prairie StyleNRHP-No Adverse
EligibleEffect
8SL2345309 South Indian River DriveBuildingc. 1935Colonial NRHP-No Adverse
RevivalEligibleEffect
8SL236Riverhill/ 4625 South Indian River Building1903Frame NRHP-No Adverse
DriveVernacularEligibleEffect
8SL237Britt House/ 4511 South Indian River Building1908Frame NRHP-No Adverse
DriveVernacularEligibleEffect
8SL238N.E. Card House/ 3915-3917Building1914Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
Indian River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect
8SL247Hoskins House/ 2929 North Indian Building1910Frame NRHP-No Adverse
River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect
24
June 1, 2017
Table 5St. Lucie County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect
1
Effects
Resource National
TypeConstruction Register Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressDateStyleStatusof Effect
8SL289Old Fort Pierce City Hall/ 315 A Buildingc. 1925ItalianateNRHP-No Adverse
AvenueListedEffect
8SL799Sunrise Theater/ 117 2nd Street Buildingc. 1923MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse
Southan RevivalListedEffect
8SL825601 South 2nd StreetBuildingc. 1935Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
vernacularEligibleEffect
8SL826Frank Tyler House/ 519 2nd Street Buildingc. 1924MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse
Southan RevivalEligibleEffect
8SL917Banyon Belle Manor/ 1001 South Building1905Georgian NRHP-No Adverse
Indian River DriveRevivalEligibleEffect
8SL9181009 South Indian River DriveBuilding1925MissionNRHP-No Adverse
EligibleEffect
8SL9201029 South Indian River DriveBuilding1920Georgian NRHP-No Adverse
RevivalEligibleEffect
8SL926O.L. Peacock House/ 2211 South Building1920MediterraneNRHP-No Adverse
Indian River Drivean RevivalEligibleEffect
8SL930Stephen LesherHouse/ 2501 Building1920Italian NRHP-No Adverse
South Indian River DriveRenaissancEligibleEffect
e Revival
8SL931Carlton-Vest House/ 2507 South Building1920Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
Indian River DriveVernacularEligibleEffect
8SL932Casa Del Rio/2513 South Indian Building1920Italian NRHP-No Adverse
River DriveRenaissancEligibleEffect
e Revival
8SL933Babe Phelps House/ 2521 South Building1935MontereyNRHP-No Adverse
Indian River DriveEligibleEffect
8SL1599ShadetreeStudio/ 2900 Old Dixie Building1950Frame NRHP-No Adverse
HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect
8SL1922East Coast Packers/ 2130 Old Building1950Industrial NRHP-No Adverse
Dixie HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect
1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed
properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online).
25
June 1, 2017
Table 6Martin County: Historic Properties Within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect
1
Effects
National
Resource Construction Register Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleStatusof Effect
8MT1573Witham Field AirportMixed NRHP-No Adverse
DistrictEligibleEffect
8MT1621Dixie HighwayLinear NRHP-No Adverse
ResourceEligibleEffect
8MT46George W. Parks Store/ Stuart Feed/ Building1901Frame NRHP-No Adverse
101 South Flagler AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect
8MT84Fern Building/ 73 West Flagler Buildingc. 1950Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect
8MT86Lyric Theatre/ 59 Southwest Flagler Buildingc. 1926Mediterranean NRHP-No Adverse
AvenueRevivalListedEffect
8MT130East Coast Lumber and Supply/ 49 Building1917Frame NRHP-No Adverse
Southwest Flagler AvenueVernacularEligibleEffect
8MT131Hobe South Cabinetry/ 500 South Building1917-c. 1926Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
Dixie HighwayVernacularEligibleEffect
8MT307Crary House/ 161 Southwest Flagler Building1925Tudor NRHP-No Adverse
AvenueRevivalEligibleEffect
8MT83812200 Southeast Nassau StreetBuildingc. 1941Frame NRHP-No Adverse
VernacularEligibleEffect
8MT1066250 North Flagler RoadBuildingc. 1940Masonry NRHP-No Adverse
VernacularEligibleEffect
1Includes properties listed in, or eligible for listing in, the National Register of Historic Places. For a full list of surveyed
properties, please see the 2013 CRAR and 2015 CRAR Addendum Appendices (online).
Table 7Palm Beach County: Historic Properties within the N-S Corridor APEfor Indirect
1
Effects
National
Register
Resource Construction Determination
FMSF #Site Name / AddressTypeDateStyleStatusof Effect
8PB13340Kelsey City LayoutHistoric NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
DistrictEffect
8PB218Evergreen CemeteryCemetery1916NRHP-Eligible No Adverse
(also local Effect
designation)
8PB6064St. John’s Baptist Church/ 2010 A. Building1929MissionNRHP-EligibleNo Adverse
E. Isaacs AvenueEffect
26
June 1, 2017
Table 8Archaeological Sites Located Within the N-S Corridor APE
National Register Determination of
FMSF #Site Name / AddressSite TypeStatusEffect
8IR846RailroadMalabar-Period Shell Midden and Not Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
Artifact ScatterSHPO
8MT1287Hobe Sound National Prehistoric Campsite and Previously
No Adverse Effect
Wildlife Refuge #3Prehistoric Shell Middenrecommended as
Potentially Eligible:
Not Evaluated by
SHPO
8SL41Fort CapronHistoric FortPreviously
No Adverse Effect
recommended as
Potentially Eligible:
Not Evaluated by
SHPO
8SL1772Avenue A-Downtown Precolumbian Habitation, Not Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
FortPierceMidden, Campsite, and extractive SHPO
Site; Historic American Building
Remains, Refuse, and Artifact
Scatter
8IR1/8IR9Vero Man/Vero LocalityPleistocene Faunal assemblage:NRHP-EligibleNo Adverse Effect
Redeposited Precolumbian Burial
8SL31Fort PierceHistoric FortNRHP-ListedNo Adverse Effect
Sites added by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, May 2017
8SL3Ft. Pierce MoundMidden/MoundNot Evaluated by No AdverseEffect
SHPO
High Probability -Site AUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
SHPO
High Probability -Site BUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
SHPO
High Probability -Site CUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
SHPO
High Probability -Site DUnknownNot Evaluated by No Adverse Effect
SHPO
27
June 1, 2017
ATTACHMENT 2: KNOWN SITES AND AREAS OF ARCHAEOLOGICAL
SENSITIVITY WHERE MONITORING WILL OCCUR AND LOCATIONS WHERE
HORIZONTAL DIRECTIONAL DRILL WILL BE EMPLOYED
28
June 1, 2017