skip
general nav links
About ACHP
![](dot_clear.gif)
ACHP News
![](dot_clear.gif)
National Historic
Preservation
Program
![](dot_clear.gif)
Working with
Section 106
![](dot_clear.gif)
Federal, State, & Tribal Programs
![](dot_clear.gif)
Training & Education
![](dot_clear.gif)
Publications
![](dot_clear.gif)
Search |
![](dot_clear.gif) |
skip
specific nav links
Home Working
with Section 106 ACHP
Case Digest Spring
2002 Nebraska: Construction of Beltway
Around Lincoln
Nebraska:
Construction of Beltway Around Lincoln
Agency: Federal
Highway Administration
In
a classic case illustrating the effects of sprawl, proposed construction
of a four-lane beltway around Lincoln, Nebraska, has the potential
to affect a large number of rural cultural landscapes potentially
eligible for the National Register of Historic Places. ACHP has emphasized
that the effects on these historic properties from future development
around a new beltway should be considered in the plan. |
FHWA has proposed to provide financial assistance to the Nebraska Department
of Roads to build a four-lane south and east beltway around Lincoln, Nebraska.
Three alternatives have been suggested for the east route that are at
various distances from downtown Lincoln.
The farthest proposed route from the city appears to be the one that
would directly affect the most historic properties. They include many
historic farmsteads such as the Herters-Hagaman Farm, Haeger Dairy,
and the Stevens Creek Stock Farm, which was placed on the National Trusts
for Historic Preservations Eleven Most Endangered Historic
Places list.
Stevens Creek Stock Farm, Lincoln, NE (photo courtesy
of Preservation Association of Lincoln)
FHWA suggested the alternative routes in a 2001 draft Environmental Impact
Statement (EIS), which also included a discussion of the historic properties
that may be affected by the routes and an assessment of effects that may
result from the proposed beltway.
ACHP disagreed with FHWAs finding that effects to historic properties
from future development around the new beltway did not need to be considered
because the City of Lincoln developed a comprehensive plan for managing
future growth. Although the comprehensive plan may serve to help mitigate
the effects of associated growth, the effects of growth on these rural
historic properties needed to be considered under both the National Environmental
Policy Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.
In addition, other consulting parties in the case raised questions about
the appropriate boundaries of the historic properties identified in the
draft EIS.
ACHP consulted with FHWA, the Nebraska State Historic Preservation Officer
(SHPO), and the National Trust to see if the disagreement could be resolved
without requiring FHWA to seek a formal determination on the appropriate
boundaries of the historic properties from the Keeper of the National
Register.
Because an agreement could not be reached, however, ACHP decided that
a formal determination from the Keeper was the most expedient way of resolving
the disagreement, and it requested FHWA to seek a final determination
of eligibility for seven historic farmsteads. FHWA did not comply with
this request citing that the mid-distance alternative, rather than the
farthest proposed route, would be chosen in the final EIS and thus would
not directly affect the properties in question.
The consulting parties, including ACHP, the City of Lincoln, the Nebraska
Department of Roads, the Nebraska SHPO, the National Trust, and Citizens
for a Responsible Route Selection, agreed that the mid-distance alternative
was the best choice since it would have the least impact on historic properties.
They drafted a Memorandum of Agreement with FHWA that addresses both direct
and indirect effects that may result from the mid-distance alternative.
The agreement, which was signed by all parties in May 2002, calls for
development of a landscape design around certain areas of the project
to screen visual impacts, and for historic property owners to work with
the National Trust to set up conservation easements to protect their land
from potential future development resulting from the beltway.
Staff contact: Jane
Crisler
Posted July 2, 2002
Return to Top |