Loading...
MOA RECEIVED Massachusetts Division OCT i 1 2005 US.Depanment 55 Broadway, 10th Floor of Transportation Cambridge, MA 02142 DEPT, OF PLANNING & Federal Highway CONIMLNilY DEVELOPMENT Administration ` June 22, 2005 In Reply Refer To: HEC-MA Mr. John Blundo, P.E. Chief Engineer, Massachusetts Highway Department 10 Park Plaza Boston,Massachusetts 02116 Subject.Salem-Beverly Transportation Project First Amendment to the MOA Dear Mr. Blundo: Please find attached,one copy of the fully executed"First Amendment"to the 1992 Memorandum of Agreement(MOA) developed for the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project including a copy of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's (ACHP)June 4, 2005 transmittal letter. FHWA will make sure that all mutually agreed-upon measures intended to ensure that the project will have no adverse effect upon the First Universalist Church building (including the measures described in MassHighway's March 9, 2005 letter to Reverend Seavey) are incorporated into the final design plans for the Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass portion of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project. FHWA and MassHighway will continue to consult with the leaders of the First Universalist Society regarding implementation of these measures. The Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer's April 15, 2005 memorandum to FHWA evidences the State Historic Preservation Officer's acceptance of the FHWA's "No Adverse Effect"finding for the Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass portion of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation's June 2, 2005 execution of the First Amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project evidences the Council's acceptance that the FHWA has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on the Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass portion of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project, and that the FHWA has taken into account the effects of this undertaking on historic properties. r 4Z ., 2 The above agreements and acceptances complete the Section 106 review process for the Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass portion of the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project. Sincerely yours, Stanley Gee Division Administrator By: Alexander Almeida Project Delivery Team Leader Attachments cc: Signatory Parties: Ms. Carol Legard - ACHP Ms. Brona Simon—MHC w/attachments Concurring Parties: Ms. Lynn Duncan—City of Salem—Planning Department w/attachments Mr. Lance Kasparian— Salem Historical Commission w/attachments Interested Parties: Reverend Gail Seavey—First Universalist Society w/attachments Secretary-Downtown Salem Neighborhood Association w/attachments Mr. James Treadwell,w/attachments Mr. Staley McDermet, w/attachments Mr. John Goff,Historic Salem, Inc.,w/attachments Mr. Greg Prendergast—MED Environmental w/attachments File: Location- Salem C R File TJ~7 JM j{� Preserving America's Heritage June 4,2005 John McVann Senior Area Engineer Massachusetts Division Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th Floor Cambridge,MA 02142 REF: First Amendment to the Memorandum of Agreement for the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project. Dear Mr.McVann: The enclosed Amendment No. 1 to the Memorandum of Agreement(MOA)regarding the Salem- Beverly Transportation project has been executed by the ACNP. This action constitutes the comments of the ACNP required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation and the ACHP's regulations. We have retained a copy of this amendment for our files. Please provide copies of the fully executed amendment to the other signatories. The ACHP appreciates your cooperation in amending the MOA to address the changes in the project design. We also appreciate changes you have made to the project design to address concerns raised by Jim Treadwell of Historic Salem,Inc., and the First Universalist Society; specifically regarding decreasing access to the First Universalist Church and the potential increase in noise and vibrations that may result from project construction and the proximity of traffic to the northwest comer of the church. Although the revised project does not encroach on the Church property, it will add three new lanes of traffic immediately adjacent to the Church's Bridge street entrance. FHWA should make sure that all measures intended to ensure that the project has"no adverse effect"on the Church are incorporated into the final design plans. In a letter dated March 9,2005 to Reverend Gail Seavey,Mass Highway committed to the installation of traffic signals,well delineated pavement markings,and pedestrian-activated crossing signals near both ends of the Church property. This letter also commits Mass Highway to extending the proposed new sidewalk approximately 60 feet along the Ash Street side of the Church property and to having a contractor take a precondition photographic survey and keep a seismograph monitoring record of the church basement as part of the construction contract. If one has not already been developed, we encourage you to make sure that a monitoring plan is drafted to ensure that any potentially damaging vibrations caused by construction are quickly identified and eliminated, before this historic building is irreversibly damaged. ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue NW, Suite 809•Washington, DC 20004 Phone: 202-606-8503• Fax:202-606-8647 •acho®acho.00v•v .achn.onv We encourage you to continue to work with the First Universalist Society to resolve,as best you can,any remaining concerns they have and to ensure that the project has no adverse effect to the Church. Should you have any questions, please contact me at(202)606-8522 or by e-mail at clegard@achp.gov. Sincerely, htil/VV�.. 7 d r�l Carol Legard QQ FHWA Liaison Office of Federal Agency Programs Enclosure FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER,AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS,the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA),the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO)and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation(Council)have heretofore entered into a Memorandum of Agreement(the"MOA,"copy attached)effective July 14, 1992,regarding the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project;and WHEREAS,FHWA has requested the SHPO and the Council to consent to amend the above-mentioned MOA to delete in its entirety Stipulation IH,as the Salem Signal Tower will no longer be affected by the undertaking;and WHEREAS,the parties to this First Amendment desire to do so. NOW THEREFORE,FHWA,the SHPO,and the Council hereby agree that the MOA entered into by the parties concerning the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project should be amended,and the same is hereby amended by deleting in its entirety Stipulation numbered II of the MOA. The parties hereby acknowledge and reaffirm their commitment to perform all duties previously set forth in the attached MOA,and these duties are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Execution of this First Amendment to the MOA evidences that FHWA has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of that undertaking on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION By: _._ Date: S)anley Occ,Division Administrator MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER B Idi °r" �tiw`rr1� Date: y /Q� Cara Metz,MA SHPO ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTO C PRESERVATION /V 16d' By: ( -- - -- Date: John M.Fowler,Executive Director FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER,AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT d�-- � Date: /Z /O O John Blundo,Chief Engineer SALEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date: IT Duncan,City Planner SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION / By: Date: Lance Kasua , C iamnan 2 Advisory C Council On Historic Preservation The Old Pmt Office Building noo Pennsylvania Avenue.NW,#809 Washington.DC20004 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHT•4AY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE H=STORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has consulted with the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory council on Historic Preservation (Council) pursuant to the regulations (36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) , and it has been determined that the Salem- Beverly Transportation Project will have an effect upon historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) , the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Salem Historical Commission, and the Salem Planning Department have participated in the consultation and have been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agrement; NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA, the Massachusetts SHPO, and the Council agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. stipulations FHWA, in coordination with the MHO, will ensure that the following measures are carried out. 1. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE STREET RELOCATION, SALEM A. In consultation with the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project design plan will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the Bridge Street Relocation are compatible with neighboring historic properties. Consultation should include, but not be 2 limited to lighting, pedestrian walkways, curbcuts and curbing, planting materials, waterfront design, traffic signals, and other roadway design details, and should be guided by the following considerations. 1. Lighting. Lighting, both for the roadway and Pedestrian areas, should be compatible in style scale, and location with the adjacent historic properties. 2. Curb cuts Curbing and Barriers. Curb cuts should be granite and of suitable dimensions and, if possible, should not be planned in the median strip. To the maximum extent possible, use of jersey barriers should be limited. 3. Landscaping. To the extent possible, landscaping, both associated with the roadway and the waterfront park, should be employed to provide a year-round visual buffer between the project and adjacent historic properties and provide a noise barrier, as appropriate. 4. Traffic Signals. Traffic signals and signing, while complying with ASHTO standards and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUATCD) , should exclude the use of mastarms if at all possible. B. Following completion the project design plan will be reviewed by the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and .the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any of these parties disagree on any provision of the design plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. II. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE AND BEVERLY APPROACH A In consultation with the Beverly Planning Department, the Beverly Historic District Commission, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project treatment plan for the bridge and Beverly approach portion of the project will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the bridge approach to Beverly are compatitle to the neighboring historic district. This project treatment plan should include, but not be limited to, the fol:towing considerations. 3 1• Traffic Controls, The use of signing, slgnalization, and/or barriers, to be developed in coordination with the appropriate City officials,, to ensure adequate traffic control to avoid an increase of traffic through the Fish Flake Historic District, to the extent possibie and to be compatible with the character of the historic district. Z • Lighting. The use of bridge lighting standards and directional signing should help reduce the Perceived elevation of the bridge profile be compatible with the surrounding area and neighboring historic district to the extent Possible. 3. Barriers. Reevaluation of the use, type, and location of road barriers in the median strip and at side edges, to determine whether they would be desirable, safe, ' and effective, and, if so, what design would be most compatible with the neighboring historic district. The use of jersey barriers should be limited or avoided if at all possible. 4 . Pedestrian Access. Enhancement of pedestrian access to the bridge and to the Ferry Way Landing to afford a safe and inviting. access to both. 5. Landscaping. Development of a comprehensive landscaping scheme that would use indigenous species and decorative plantings, as well as appropriate paving materials and hard design elements, to mute the expanse of approach road surface, wing walls, and abutments and enhance the gateway character of the approach 3,ocation. 6. Sicrnina. MHD should consider placement of interpretive signing, developed by the City, at appropriate locations in the approach area, consistent with the MUTCD guidelines. Traffic signing, while complying with the MUTCD; should be in scale with the adjacent historic district to the extent possible. B. The project treatment plan will be reviewed by the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any party disagree with any of the aforementioned provis::on of the project treatment plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 4 III. MOVIE OF THE SALEM SIGNAL TOWER In consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) , the Salem Signal Tower (Tower) will be relocated within the confines of the present railroad station site. The relocation will be carried out in accordance with a plan reviewed and approved by the Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO, that provides, at a minimum, for the following: A. When the Tower is under the jurisdiction of the MHD, the Department will ensure that the structure is properly ventilated, secured, and protected against vandalism and the elements. B. The Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO shall be afforded 30 days to review and comment on the new site plan for the Tower. C. Specifications for the move will be reviewed by the Massachusetts SHPO and will be in accordance with the approaches recommended in Moving Historic Buildings (Sohn Obed Curtis, 1979) . IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Should the Massachusetts SHPO, the Salem Planning Department, the Salem Historical Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, or the Beverly Historic District Commission object to plans submitted for review in accordance with Stipulation I or II, they shall notify the MHD, with a copy to the Massachusetts SHPO with specific recommendations for changes, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the plans. FHWA and the Massachusetts SHPO will consult to resolve the disagreement. If FHWA determines that the objection cannot be resolved, FHWA shall notify the Council with a description of any alternatives or _• enhancement measures that were considered but not chosen and the reasons for their rejection. The Council will be afforded thirty (30) days to respond. Any Council comment provided in response to such a request will be taken into account by FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR § 800.6(c) (2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out all actions under this agreement that are not the subjects of the dispute will remain unchanged. s Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement and carrying out its terms evidences that FHWA. has afforded the Council an .opportunity to comment on the Beverly-Salem Transportation Project and its effects on historic properties, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the project on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATIO14 / J By: 4 a.i �tyi�icn morin!!/I' Y Date: Zx 92� (Name & Title) MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER �rn^ rn Date: ith McDonough ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION BY: I Y�f Date: 7 I 7y Robert D. Bush, Executive Director Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT B;;game n — �C-r Date: �i Z� f Z itl'e) SALEM PLA�NNNIIN-,G''� DEPARTMENT By: A U ( v� Date: �r c (tpRaTitle) 6 SALEM H ISTORICAL COMMISSION Jt� C) �a�:T�- Date:By: — (Name 6 Title) PLANNING EPARTMENT dd l/,' ala Date: . . r BEVERLY HISTORIC 'DI �CT ate: gy. Tia e. d Title) FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Date: I /0 0 Y John Blundo, Chief Engineer SALEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT Date: L n Duncan, City Planner SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: 01 Date: Lance Kaspa� Chairman 2 Massachusetts Division RECEEIVED 55 Broadway, 10th Floor US.DeportmeroCambridge, MA 02142 APR 2 1 2005 of Transportation Federal Highway DEPT. OF PL!'TMG& Administration COiVVOUNI Y DLVELOPN1ENT January 12, 200 In Reply Refer To: HEC-MA Ms. Lynn Duncan, City Planner Department of Planning and Community Development 120 Washington Street Salem,MA 01970 Subject. Salem-Beverly Transportation Project Section 106—MOA Amendment Dear Ms. Duncan: Please find enclosed with this letter, the original "First Amendment' to the Section 106 Memorandum of Agreement(MOA) for the referenced project. A copy of the original MOA is also included for your reference. This amendment was developed in consultation with representatives of the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA), the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP)and the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO) - the three signatory parties to the original 1992 MOA. The proposed "First Amendment' to the original 1992 MOA deletes Stipulation III -Move of the Salem Signal Tower, as design modifications to the proposed roadway alignment no longer require the relocation of this structure. If you agree with the proposed"First Amendment", please sign the original and return it to this office so we continue to circulate the document for signature amongst the remaining signatory and concurring parties.We will provide you with a copy of the fully executed"First Amendment'upon completion of the signature process. Please do not hesitate to contact us, should you have any questions or comments. Sincerely yours, Stanley Gee Division Administrator By: Alexander Almeida Project Delivery Team Leader Enclosures cc: Mr. .Iohn Blundo— MHD Chief Engineer Mr. Cara Metz MHC Mr. Stephen Roper--MHD - Environmental Mr. Lance Kasparian—Salem Historic Commission FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS,the Federal Highway Administration(FHWA),the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer(SHPO)and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation(Council)have heretofore entered into a Memorandum of Agreement(the"MOA,"copy attached)effective July 14, 1992, regarding the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project; and WHEREAS,FHWA has requested the SHPO and the Council to consent to amend the above-mentioned MOA to delete in its entirety Stipulation III, as the Salem Signal Tower will no longer be affected by the undertaking; and WHEREAS,the parties to this First Amendment desire to do so. NOW THEREFORE, FHWA,the SHPO, and the Council hereby agree that the MOA entered into by the parties concerning the Salem-Beverly Transportation Project should be amended, and the same is hereby amended by deleting in its entirety Stipulation numbered III of the MOA. The parties hereby acknowledge and reaffirm their commitment to perform all duties previously set forth in the attached MOA,and these duties are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. Execution of this First Amendment to the MOA evidences that FHWA has afforded the Council a reasonable opportunity to comment on the undertaking and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of that undertaking on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION By: a. G+, Date: "ley Gee,Division Administrator MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER B : tdti'ev"` �liwbvi Date: jCara Metz, MA SHPO ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION By: Date: John M. Fowler, Executive Director I FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT Date: John Blundo, Chief Engineer SALEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT By: Date: Lynn Duncan,City Planner SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: Date: Lance Kasparian, Chairman 2 Advisory Council On Historic Preservation The Old Post Office Building iiao Pennsylvania Avenue.NW. 0809 Washington.DC 20004 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGFrgAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has consulted with the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) pursuant to the regulations (36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) , and it has been determined that the Salem- Beverly Transportation Project will have an effect upon historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) , the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Salem Historical Commission, and the Salem Planning Department have participated in the consultation and have been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agrement; NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA, the Massachusetts SHPO, and the Council agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. Stipulations FHWA, in coordination with the MHD, will ensure that the following measures are carried out. I. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE STREET RELOCATION, SALEM A. In consultation with the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project design plan will be developed to ensure, within acce.-table safety standards, that improvements associ--ted with the Bridge Street Relocation are compatible with neighboring historic properties. Consul-:ation should include, but not be 2 limited to lighting, pedestrian walkways, curbcuts and curbing, planting materials, waterfront design, traffic signals, and other roadway design details, and should be guided by the following considerations. 1. Lighting. Lighting, both for the roadway and Pedestrian areas, should be compatible in style, scale, and location with the adjacent historic properties. 2 . Curb cuts Curbing and Barriers. Curb cuts should be granite and of suitable dimensions and, if possible, should not be planned in the median strip. To the maximum extent possible, use of jersey barriers should be limited. 3 . Landscaping. To the extent possible, landscaping, both associated with the roadway and the waterfront park, should be employed to provide a year-round visual buffer between the project and adjacent historic properties and provide a noise barrier, as appropriate. 4 . Traffic Signals. Traffic signals and signing, while complying with ASHTO standards and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUATCD) , should exclude the use of mastarms if at all possible. B. Following completion the project design plan will be reviewed by the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and .the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any of these parties disagree on any provision of the design plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. II. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE AND BEVERLY APPROACH A. In consultation with the Beverly Planning Department, the Beverly Historic District Commission, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project treatment plan for the bridge and Beverly approach portion of the project will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the bridge approach to Beverly are compatitle to the neighboring historic district. This project treatment plan should include, but not be limited to, the following considerations. 3 1. Traffic Controls. The use of signing, signalization, and/or barriers, to be developed in coordination with the appropriate City officials, to ensure adequate traffic control to avoid an increase of traffic through the Fish Flake Historic District, to the extent possible and to be compatible with the character of the historic district. 2 . Lighting. The use of bridge lighting standards and directional signing should help reduce the perceived elevation of the bridge profile be compatible with the surrounding area and neighboring historic district to the extent possible. 3 . Barriers. Reevaluation of the use, type, and location of road barriers in the median strip and at side edges, to determine whether they would be . desirable, safe, and effective, and, if so, what design would be most compatible with the neighboring historic district. The use of jersey barriers should be limited or avoided if at all possible. 4. Pedestrian Access. Enhancement of pedestrian access to the bridge and to the Ferry Way Landing to afford a safe and inviting. access to both. 5. Landscaping. Development of a comprehensive landscaping scheme that would use indigenous species and decorative plantings, as well as appropriate paving materials and hard design elements, to mute the expanse of approach road surface, wing walls, and abutments and enhance the gateway character of the approach location. 6. Signing. MHD should consider placement of _. interpretive signing, developed by the City, at appropriate locations in the approach area, consistent with the MUTCD guidelines. Traffic signing, while complying with the MUTCD, should be in scale with the adjacent historic district to the extent possible. B. The project treatment plan will be reviewed by the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any party disagree with any of the aforementioned provis:_on of the project treatment plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. 4 III. MOVE OF THE SALEM SIGNAL TOWER In consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) , the Salem Signal Tower (Tower) will be relocated within the confines of the present railroad station site. The relocation will be carried out in accordance with a plan reviewed and approved by the Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO, that provides, at a minimum, for the following: A. When the Tower is under the jurisdiction of the MHD, the Department will ensure that the structure is properly ventilated, secured, and protected against vandalism and the elements. B. The Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO shall be afforded 30 days to review and comment on the new site plan for the Tower. C. Specifications for the move will be reviewed by the Massachusetts SHPO and will be in accordance with the approaches recommended in Moving Historic Buildings (John Obed Curtis, 1979) . IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Should the Massachusetts SHPO, the Salem Planning Department, the Salem Historical Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, or the Beverly Historic District Commission object to plans submitted for review in accordance with Stipulation I or II, they shall notify the MHD, with a copy to the Massachusetts SHPO with specific recommendations for changes, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the plans. FHWA and the Massachusetts SHPO will consult to resolve the disagreement. If FHWA determines that the objection cannot be resolved, FHWA shall notify the Council with a description of any alternatives or _ enhancement measures that were considered but not chosen and the reasons for their rejection. The Council will be afforded thirty (30) days to respond. Any Council comment provided in response to such a request will be taken into Account by FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR § 800. 6(c) (2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out all actions under this agreement that are not the subjects of the dispute will remain unchanged. 5 Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement and carrying out its terms evidences that FHWA has afforded the Council an opportunity to comment on the Beverly-Salem Transportation Project and its effects on historic properties, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the project on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION i By: i I' r Date: Z Z19 v (Name & Title) MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER By: Date: 2, ith McDonough ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION By: o Gz Date: Robert D. Bush, Executive Director Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT /z�/S By: � Date: Z_ ame itle) SALEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT By: Date: ('game 4 Title) 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: • i cJ�^ � a� Date: l he (• <� 19`t (Name & Title) 1 BEVERLY PLANNING EPARTMENT J By: va Date: BEVERLY HI TORIC DI CT/COMMISSION 7� By: /A/Aw _ GHPf ,r�✓ Date: r�XT9� Na e b Titlej Hm ic RO, Box 865 Salem, fvIA 01970 incorporated Telephone: (978) 745-0799 June 21, 2004 Mr. Alexander Almeida Massachusetts Division Federal Highway Administration U.S. Department of Transportation 55 Broadway, I0'h Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 Re: Salem-Beverly Transportation Improvement Project Realignment of Bridge Street Bypass (005402) Section 106 Effect Finding Historic Salem would like to comment on the letter from the Massachusetts Highway Department to the Federal Highway Administration dated April 15, 2004 and conveyed to the Massachusetts Historical Commission by the Federal Highway Administration on May 7, 2004. We have concerns about the findings which we would like to draw to your attention. We do not agree with the finding of"no effect" with respect to the First Universalist Church. In particular, the letter does not address the visual effect of creating an additional 20 feet of roadway directly adjacent to the Church, nor does it address whether or not there is an anticipated increase in traffic as a result of the project. The fact that the"back of the church faces the roadway is not an obviating factor, as this is the facade which is most visible to the public and in effect acts as the church's front door". Also, has there been any determination as to the effect of construction and excavation on the structure, and recommendations as to actions that should be taken to mitigate any potential adverse effects? Similarly, with regard to the Bridge Street Neck Historic District,there is no discussion of the visual impact of the road on the historic resources and efforts to mitigate the effect, nor of the effects of noise and vibration from the new road. Finally, in the section on Section 106 Consultation, MHD states that they "have considered the views of other, interested local parties." We are not aware of any efforts Fax: (978) 744-4530 - Em-.ail: hsi@nii.net ':h#to:/,'viv✓,r.- is€oricsaiem.orrgi to contact those listed as "interested parties"to the 106 review process nor the public in general in the determination of the effect findings. We remain concerned, as we have stated previously, that the public has not yet had an opportunity to review and comment on thel06 review process, as we understand is required under Section 106. Thank you very much for your attention to this important matter. We would be very happy to meet with you at any time to further discuss our concerns. Si er . Rich d Thompson Offi e Administrator CCs Massachusetts Historic Commission City of Salem Planning Department Salem Historic District Commission Advisory Council On Historic Preservation The Old Post Office Building 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue,NW,#809 Washington,DC 20004 JUL 1 5 1992 Mr. Donald E. Hammer Division Administrator Region One Federal Highway Administration 55 Broadway, 10th Floor Cambridge, MA 02142 REF: Salem/Beverly Transportation Project (BR-F-54 (085) Dear Mr. Hammer: The enclosed Memorandum of Agreement for the referenced project has been accepted by the Council. This acceptance completes the requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and the Council 's regulations. A copy of the Agreement has also been sent to the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer, the Massachusetts Highway Department, and all of the concurring parties. We appreciate your cooperation in reaching a satisfactory resolution of this matter. cerely, Klima ctor, Eastern Office Project Review Enclosure Advisory Council On Historic Preservation The Old Post Office Building 1100 Pennsylvania Avenue,NW,#809 Washington,DC 20004 MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT AMONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION, THE MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER, AND THE ADVISORY COUNCIL ON HISTORIC PRESERVATION REGARDING THE SALEM-BEVERLY TRANSPORTATION PROJECT WHEREAS, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) has consulted with the Massachusetts State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (Council) pursuant to the regulations (36 CFR Part 800) implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (16 U.S.C. 470f) , and it has been determined that the Salem- Beverly Transportation Project will have an effect upon historic properties included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places; and WHEREAS, the Massachusetts Highway Department (MHD) , the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Salem Historical Commission, and the Salem Planning Department have participated in the consultation and have been invited to concur in this Memorandum of Agrement; NOW, THEREFORE, FHWA, the Massachusetts SHPO, and the Council agree that the undertaking shall be implemented in accordance with the following stipulations in order to take into account the effect of the undertaking on historic properties. Stipulations FHWA, in coordination with the MHD, will ensure that the following measures are carried out. I. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE STREET RELOCATION, SALEM A. In consultation with the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project design plan will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the Bridge Street Relocation are compatible with neighboring historic properties. Consultation should include, but not be 2 limited to lighting, pedestrian walkways, curbcuts and curbing, planting materials, waterfront design, traffic signals, and other roadway design details, and should be guided by the following considerations. 1. Lighting. Lighting, both for the roadway and pedestrian areas, should be compatible in style, scale, and location with the adjacent historic properties. 2 . Curb cuts, Curbing. and Barriers. Curb cuts should be granite and of suitable dimensions and, if possible, should not be planned in the median strip. To the maximum extent possible, use of jersey barriers should be limited. 3 . Landscaping. To the extent possible, landscaping, both associated with the roadway and the waterfront park, should be employed to provide a year-round visual buffer between the project and adjacent historic properties and provide a noise barrier, as appropriate. 4. Traffic Signals. Traffic signals and signing, while complying with ASHTO standards and the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUATCD) , should exclude the use of mastarms if at all possible. B. Following completion the project design plan will be reviewed by the Salem Historical Commission, the Salem Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any of these parties disagree on any provision of the design plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. II. DESIGN OF THE BRIDGE AND BEVERLY APPROACH A. In consultation with the Beverly Planning Department, the Beverly Historic District Commission, and the Massachusetts SHPO, a project treatment plan for the bridge and Beverly approach portion of the project will be developed to ensure, within acceptable safety standards, that improvements associated with the bridge approach to Beverly are compatible to the neighboring historic district. This project treatment plan should include, but not be limited to, the following considerations. l 3 1. Traffic Controls. The use of signing, signalization, and/or barriers, to be developed in coordination with the appropriate City officials, to ensure adequate traffic control to avoid an increase of traffic through the Fish Flake Historic District, to the extent possible and to be compatible with the character of the historic district. 2 . Lighting. The use of bridge lighting standards and directional signing should help reduce the perceived elevation of the bridge profile be compatible with the surrounding area and neighboring historic district to the extent possible. 3 . Barriers. Reevaluation of the use, type, and location of road barriers in the median strip and at side edges, to determine whether they would be desirable, safe, and effective, and, if so, what design would be most compatible with the neighboring historic district. The use of jersey barriers should be limited or avoided if at all possible. 4 . Pedestrian Access. Enhancement of pedestrian access to the bridge and to the, Ferry Way Landing to afford a safe and inviting access to both. 5. Landscaping. Development of a comprehensive landscaping scheme that would use indigenous species and decorative plantings, as well as appropriate paving materials and hard design elements, to mute the expanse of approach road surface, wing walls, and abutments and enhance the gateway character of the approach location. 6. Signing. MHD should consider placement of interpretive signing, developed by the City, at appropriate locations in the approach area, consistent with the MUTCD guidelines. Traffic signing, while complying with the MUTCD, should be in scale with the adjacent historic district to the extent possible. B. The project treatment plan will be reviewed by the Beverly Historic District Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, and the Massachusetts SHPO. Should any party disagree with any of the aforementioned provision of the project treatment plan, the objection will be settled in accordance with Stipulation IV below, DISPUTE RESOLUTION. I 4 III. MOVE OF THE SALEM SIGNAL TOWER In consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) , the Salem Signal Tower (Tower) will be relocated within the confines of the present railroad station site. The relocation will be carried out in accordance with a plan reviewed and approved by the Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO, that provides, at a minimum, for the following: A. When the Tower is under the, jurisdiction of the MHD, the Department will ensure that the structure is properly ventilated, secured, and protected against vandalism and the elements. B. The Salem Historical Commission and the Massachusetts SHPO shall be afforded 30 days to review and comment on the new site plan for the Tower. C. Specifications for the move will be reviewed by the Massachusetts SHPO and will be in accordance with the approaches recommended in Moving Historic Buildings (John Obed Curtis, 1979) . IV. DISPUTE RESOLUTION Should the Massachusetts SHPO, the Salem Planning Department, the Salem Historical Commission, the Beverly Planning Department, or the Beverly Historic District Commission object to plans submitted for review in accordance with Stipulation I or II, they shall notify the MHD, with a copy to the Massachusetts SHPO with specific recommendations for changes, within fifteen (15) days of receipt of the plans. FHWA and the Massachusetts SHPO will consult to resolve the disagreement. If FHWA determines that the objection cannot be resolved, FHWA shall notify the Council with a description of any alternatives or enhancement measures that were considered but not chosen and the reasons for their rejection. The Council will be afforded thirty (30) days to respond. Any Council comment provided in response to such a request will be taken into account by FHWA in accordance with 36 CFR § 800. 6 (c) (2) with reference only to the subject of the dispute; FHWA's responsibility to carry out all actions under this agreement that are not the subjects of the dispute will remain unchanged. s 5 Execution of this Memorandum of Agreement and carrying out its terms evidences that FHWA has afforded the Council an opportunity to comment on the Beverly-Salem Transportation Project and its effects on historic properties, and that FHWA has taken into account the effects of the project on historic properties. FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINI"STRATION/��� 1 By: IV/Sion ' tunl7// oV Date: 2-?-/-9 Z� (Name & Title) MASSACHUSETTS STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER By: Date: `{ Yi-idith McDonough ADVISORY COUNCIILON HISTORIC PRESERVATION J4i4'9 By: . Date: Robert D. Bush, Executive Director Concur: MASSACHUSETTS HIGHWAY DEPARTMENT By: C Date: C' Z0 9 Z- ame itle) ✓, I SALEM PLANNING DEPARTMENT J u By: Date: n C� (time 4 Title) 6 SALEM HISTORICAL COMMISSION By: D (� �rt�VO� Date: (Name & Title) BEVERLY PLANNING EPARTMENT By: Dater BEVERLY HISTORIC DI CT COMMISSION By: 4 _ G�tgr t3✓ Date: e & Title)