3.4 HISTORIC, ARCHEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES

Transcription

1 3.4 HISTORIC, ARCHEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES Summary of Results Table provides a summary of the cultural resources analysis of the Preferred Alternative. Each impact is analyzed for its effect on National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) eligible or listed properties. Adverse Effects diminish the qualities of significance that qualify the property for inclusion in the NRHP. Therefore, the Preferred Alternative may have impacts; however, those impacts may or may not be classified as an adverse effect to the resource. TABLE SUMMARY OF PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE CULTURAL RESOURCES NRHP- Eligible or -Listed Properties Historic Properties and Linear Resources Archaeological (Sites) Impacts Number of Impacts to NRHP- Direct Impacts Eligible or -Listed Properties and Linear Resources Indirect Impacts 7 0 Effects Number of Impacts to NRHP-Eligible or -Listed Properties and Linear Resources Resulting in an Adverse Effect 2 Source: Northwest Rail (NWR) Corridor Project Team, Some linear resources cross the corridor at multiple locations and would be impacted more than once. 2 Impacts and effects presented are preliminary. Formal consultation between the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), the State Historic Preservation Officer ), and the consulting parties will result in the final determination of effect. 3 Both Adverse Effects (5DV3512 and 5AM1885/5DV6243) are to historic properties analyzed through the Gold Line project. All mitigations have been fully resolved through the Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the Regional Transportation District (RTD), the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), and the SHPO. No additional Adverse Effects have been identified for properties surveyed and analyzed through the Northwest Rail Environmental Evaluation Purpose Recognition of historic and archaeological resources is a priority for the federal government, as indicated by the numerous statutes and regulations that address these resources. 1 Additionally, this analysis considers the project s effects, as defined by Section 106 of the 1 Antiquities Act of 1906, as amended (34 Stat. 225; 16 United States Code [USC] ); Historic Sites Act of 1935, as amended (49 Stat. 666; 16 USC ); NHPA, as amended (16 USC 470 et seq.); National Environmental Protection Act, as amended, (42 USC 4321 et seq.); Archaeological and Historic Preservation Act of 1974, as amended, (16 USC c-2); American Indian Religious Freedom Act of 1978, as amended (42 USC 1996 and 1996a); Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979, as amended (16 USC 470aamm); The Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990, as amended (25 USC 3001 et seq.); Executive Order 11593, Protection and Enhancement of the Cultural Environment; Executive Order 13007, Indian Sacred Sites (1996); and Executive Order 13175, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments May 2010

2 National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), on cultural resources that are listed, or eligible for listing, in the NRHP Coordination and Consultation Early in the project s initiation, the team developed a plan to efficiently implement Section 106 of the NHPA. This plan was incorporated in the project s Corridor Coordination Plan. The plan was reviewed and agreed to by the Colorado State Historic Preservation Office ), as a member of the project s Agency Working Group (AWG). For more information on the AWG and the Corridor Coordination Plan, refer to Chapter 5.0, Public Comment and Agency Coordination. Early consultation was conducted with the SHPO to determine potential consulting parties. The consulting parties invited represent a range of cultural and historic resource groups from state, national, and local agencies; Native American tribes; non-profit organizations; and advocacy groups. Coordination with SHPO, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP), and the consulting parties is ongoing. The Area of Potential Effect (APE) was initially developed by the Regional Transportation District (RTD) and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) in conjunction with SHPO and the project s consulting parties. The APE generally defined the geographic area for cultural resource survey and analysis. The APE was developed to be broad enough to capture the extent of the project s potential effects. All cultural resources correspondence with SHPO, ACHP, and the consulting parties; as well as a map of the APE is included in Appendix D. Details of the ongoing coordination process are included below in Table TABLE NORTHWEST RAIL SECTION 106 ONGOING CONSULTATION PROCESS Step Purpose Schedule 1. Meeting Early coordination with SHPO 2. Activity Development of the Corridor Coordination Plan and identification of consulting parties with SHPO 3. Activity Early information distributed to consulting parties, SHPO, and ACHP 4. Consulting Party Meeting No. 1 Early initial consultation with consulting parties, SHPO, and ACHP 5. Activity Amended APE (minor design refinements) May Completed coordination meeting regarding the project process and potential consulting parties. Developed the draft Corridor Coordination Plan and identified consulting party contacts. Contacted the SHPO, ACHP, consulting parties (including tribal governments) by mail during the scoping process to advise them of the project consultation plan, and invited their participation and comment. Solicited input from SHPO, ACHP, and the consulting parties regarding the planning process, and the proposed APE. Also solicited additional information regarding the consulting parties knowledge of known cultural resources within the project area. Contacted SHPO, ACHP, and the consulting parties by mail to solicit input regarding minor amendments to the APE. Completed June 2008 Completed June 2008 Completed June 2008 Completed July 2008 Completed May 2009

3 TABLE NORTHWEST RAIL SECTION 106 ONGOING CONSULTATION PROCESS Step Purpose Schedule 6. Activity Field surveys and draft analysis 7. Consulting Party Meeting No. 2 Ongoing consultation with consulting parties, SHPO, and ACHP 8. Activity Address and resolve comments with SHPO, ACHP, and consulting parties 9. Final 10. Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) Completion Source: NWR Corridor Project Team, Notes: ACHP = Advisory Council on Historic Preservation APE= Area of Potential Effect MOA = Memorandum of Agreement SHPO = Colorado State Historic Preservation Office TBD = to be determined USACE = United States Army Corps of Engineers Project team coordinated directly with SHPO and completed cultural resource field survey and draft analysis. Input will be solicited from consulting parties on the draft analysis including survey results, eligibility, and preliminary impacts/effects. A formal comment period will be provided, in addition to the meeting. Project team will revise the report analysis and work directly with SHPO, ACHP, and the consulting parties to resolve questions of the analysis including eligibility, impacts, and effects. Resolve comments and obtain final concurrence on all questions of eligibility and effects from SHPO. Draft and sign MOA between USACE and SHPO regarding Adverse Effects with participation from consulting parties (if applicable). Completed July 2009 Completed March 2010 Completed April 2010 Completed April 2010 Not Applicable Native American Consultation The NHPA requires involvement of interested Native American tribes in the planning process. 2 Consultation with a Native American tribe recognizes the government-togovernment relationship between the United States government and sovereign tribes. Federal agencies must be sensitive to the fact that historic properties of religious and cultural significance to one or more tribes may be located on ancestral, aboriginal, or ceded lands beyond modern reservation boundaries. Consulting tribes are offered the opportunity to identify concerns about cultural resources and comment on how the project might affect them. If it is found that the project would impact cultural resources that are eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or are of spiritual or cultural significance to one or more consulting tribes, then their role in the consultation process may also include participation in resolving how best to avoid, minimize, or mitigate those effects. Federally recognized Native American tribes with an established interest in the project study area were invited to participate as consulting parties. The Northern Cheyenne Tribe is the only regional tribal government to respond to this invitation with a formal request to become a consulting party. The Northern Cheyenne Tribe continues to receive project information and requests to identify their concerns about cultural resources and comment on the project at each step in the process. 2 Section 106 of the NHPA and the ACHP regulations [(36 CFR (c) (2) (I)] May 2010

4 Cultural Resource Identification Criteria Historic properties include those resources that are listed, or considered eligible for listing, in the NRHP. Historic properties include districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that represent past human activities. The criteria for NRHP eligibility are set forth at 36 CFR 60.4: The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects that possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and: A. that are associated with events that have made a significant contribution to broad patterns of our history; or B. that are associated with the lives of persons significant in our past; or C. that embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or D. that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history. In addition, to qualify for listing in the NRHP, a historic resource must usually be 50 years old. Archaeological resources include historic and prehistoric sites of interest and may include structures, archaeological sites, or cultural sites of importance to Native Americans. The National Park Service defines archaeological and historic resources as (National Park Service, 1998): [T]he physical evidences of past human activity, including evidences of the effects of that activity on the environment. What makes a cultural resource significant is its identity, age, location, and context in conjunction with its capacity to reveal information through the investigatory research designs, methods, and techniques used by archeologists Cultural Resource Effects Analysis Criteria The ACHP has developed regulations that guide federal agencies on how to assess effects of their undertakings on historic properties and mitigate those effects, if necessary. 3 Effects to cultural resources are defined in the following ways: No Effect (also known as No Historic Properties Affected): Either no historic properties are present, or there is no effect of any kind, neither harmful nor beneficial, on the historic properties. No Adverse Effect: There is an effect, but the effect is not harmful to those characteristics that qualify the property for inclusion in the NRHP. 3 As defined in the NHPA Section 106 regulations, an effect is an alteration to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligibility for the NRHP (36 CFR ). May

5 Adverse Effect: There is an effect, and that effect diminishes the qualities of significance that qualify the property for inclusion in the NRHP. Effects to historic properties may be direct or indirect. The planned activities are assessed to determine the likely effect of those activities on the cultural resources and on the qualities that make them NRHP-eligible. For linear resources, the project effects are based on an evaluation of the segment of the resource that falls within the project area, in the context of the entire linear feature that constitutes the NRHP-eligible historic resource. Each linear resource has an overall determination of eligibility for the resource as a whole. When an individual segment or element of the entire linear resource is recorded, it is considered part of an NRHP-eligible resource. The integrity of each impacted segment is evaluated individually to determine if it is able to convey the significance of the entire resource. The segment of the linear resource must retain enough integrity to convey significance of the entire resource. In cases where multiple segments of the same linear resource would be impacted, the evaluation of effect to the linear resource would be based on an assessment of the combined effects to the entire resource from all of the impacted segments Methodology The assessment of potential impacts to cultural resources focused on archaeological sites (historic and prehistoric), ethnographic resources (traditional cultural properties), and resources of the historic built environment (buildings, structures, linear features, etc.). The APE was developed with concurrence from the SHPO and the consulting parties. The project APE was modified to account for minor design changes along the alignment with concurrence from the SHPO and the consulting parties. The overall process for cultural resource identification, evaluation, and consultation was conducted to meet the obligations under Section 106 of the NHPA. The evaluation included the identification of historic and prehistoric resources from state and local databases, and the completion of fieldwork to survey all areas within the APE not previously inventoried. The results of the survey and all survey forms are included in Appendix D. The following sections present the summary of impacts and effects to NRHP eligible and -listed properties for both Archaeological and Historic resources as a result of the project Archaeological Resources Archaeological survey and analysis were conducted for both the No Action and Preferred Alternative Affected Environment - Archaeological The APE for archaeological resources was coincident with the project footprint, including the proposed station footprints. Additional field work was completed to addresses subsequent amendments to the APE. The APE was developed working directly with SHPO and the project s consulting parties. A review of the Office of Archeology and Historic Preservation (OAHP) database in June 2008 did not identify any previously recorded, NRHP eligible or listed archaeological May 2010

6 resources within the project APE. This is likely due to the large amount of disturbance typical of railroad construction and operation, as well as the development that has taken place along the railroad and at station locations. It was expected that there would be a low potential for finding new archaeological resources. During the summer of 2008, a pedestrian archaeological survey was conducted for previously unsurveyed portions of the APE. This survey did not identify any prehistoric or historic archaeological resources within the APE. Details of the survey are included in Appendix D Impact Evaluation Archaeological No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative assumes that existing and committed improvements, as defined in Chapter 2.0, Alternatives Considered, would be implemented by others as planned. Direct, Indirect, Temporary Construction, and Cumulative Impacts It is anticipated that archaeological resources may be impacted by some or all of the roadway and transit projects identified under the No Action Alternative. These projects would most likely result in direct, indirect, temporary construction, and cumulative impacts. The extent of these impacts will be evaluated in the environmental documents being prepared for these projects. Preferred Alternative Direct, Indirect, Temporary Construction, and Cumulative Impacts There would be no known direct, indirect, temporary construction, or cumulative impacts to NRHP eligible or listed archaeological resources from the Preferred Alternative Mitigation Archaeological No impacts or Adverse Effects have been identified to NRHP eligible or listed sites. The mitigation presented in Table below focuses on avoiding impacts to potential archaeological sites discovered during construction of the Preferred Alternative. May

7 TABLE POTENTIAL MITIGATION MEASURES FOR ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES UNDER THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Impact Impact Type Mitigation Measures Potential direct impact archaeological resources Construction Source: NWR Corridor Project Team, Where archaeological sites are discovered, ground-disturbing demolition and/or removals will be avoided, where possible. RTD will complete archaeological monitoring during construction activities. In the event that cultural deposits are discovered during construction, work would cease in the area of discovery and the SHPO would be notified. The designated representative would evaluate any such discovery, and in consultation with SHPO, complete appropriate mitigation measures, if necessary, before construction activities resume Historic Resources Historic survey and analysis were conducted for both the No Action Alternative and the Preferred Alternative Affected Environment - Historic The APE for historic resources was developed in cooperation with SHPO and the project s consulting parties. APE boundaries were identified based on logical, geographic, or other physical boundaries. In general the APE for historic resources corresponds to the proposed project impact footprint, and in the station and parking areas it extends to the surrounding properties. The APE for historic resources does expand in certain areas to account for potential visual or other impacts that may extend to resources beyond the project impact footprint. A graphic of the entire APE is included in Appendix D. A pedestrian survey during the summer of 2008 was conducted for previously unsurveyed portions of the APE. Additional field work was completed to addresses subsequent amendments to the APE. This survey identified multiple linear resources in the APE. Although there is one local historic district in the APE (Old Town Niwot Boulder County Historic District), there are no NRHP historic districts in the APE. All properties were recorded and evaluated, or re-evaluated, according to OAHP guidelines. Table summarizes the NRHP eligible or listed linear and architectural historic properties with impacts resulting from implementation of the Preferred Alternative. Details of all historic resources surveyed within the APE and the survey forms are available in Appendix D May 2010

8 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Adams 5AM44 NA Oleson House 7340 Bradburn Boulevard, Westminster Property Type NRHP Eligibility Criteria Architectural Historic Resources Residential Building Eligible Criterion C Representative Site Photo Adams 5AM64 NA Bowles House Museum 3924 W. 72 nd Avenue, Westminster Residential Property (Museum) NRHP Listed 11/3/88 Criteria B and C May

9 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Louisville 5BL9110 NA Louisville Rod and Gun Club 1101 South Street, Louisville Property Type Commercial Building NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Criteria A and C Representative Site Photo Louisville 5BL950 NA La Salla-Wilson House 1124 Main Street, Louisville Residential Property NRHP Listed 2/14/86 Criteria B and C May 2010

10 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Louisville 5BL8211 NA Mrs. Downer s Cabin 801 Lee Avenue, Louisville Property Type Residential Building NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Criteria A and C Representative Site Photo Louisville 5BL8212 NA Mrs. Downer s Cabin 809 Lee Avenue, Louisville Residential Building Eligible Criteria A and C May

11 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Louisville 5BL951 NA Steinbaugh- Murgallis House 945 Front Street, Louisville Property Type Residential Building NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Criteria B and C Representative Site Photo Louisville 5BL952 NA Stolmes House 616 Front Street, Louisville Residential Property NRHP Listed 2/14/86 Criteria B and C May 2010

12 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Denver (Analysis completed under the Gold Line) Denver (Analysis completed under the Gold Line) Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address 5DV3512 5DV Denver West Side Line Union Pacific Denver & Gulf Railroad (Colorado & Southern and Chicago Burlington & Quincy) 5DV6243 5DV Colorado & Southern siding to Clark s Junction Railroad Property Type NRHP Eligibility Criteria Linear Historic Resources Railroad Spur Railroad Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A concurrence received 2/4/09) Segment Convey Significance of Resource concurrence received 2/4/09) Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A concurrence received 2/4/09) Segment concurrence received 2/4/09) Representative Site Photo May

13 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Denver (Analysis completed under the Gold Line) Denver (Analysis completed under the Gold Line) Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address 5DV DV Boston & Colorado Smelting Company/Denver Sewer Pipe & Clay Company 5AM1888 and 5DV6243 5AM and 5DV Denver Utah Pacific Railroad, Chicago Burlington Quincy Siding & Spur (Waterworks Sales Co, J.M. Warner Co, & Richardson Lumber Spur) Property Type Railroad Railroad Spur NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A concurrence received 9/8/08) Segment concurrence received 9/8/08) Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A concurrence received 2/4/09) Segments Convey Significance of Resource concurrence received 2/4/09) Representative Site Photo No photo available May 2010

14 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Denver (Analysis completed under the Gold Line) Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Property Type 5AM1748 NA Fisher Ditch Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Criterion A concurrence received 9/8/08) Representative Site Photo Adams 5AM1888 NA BNSF Railroad Milepost 4.0 to 8.29 Railroad Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (OAHP eligible, 1/07) Received 7/30/09) May

15 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Westminster 5JF519 NA BNSF Railroad Milepost 8.29 to (from county border to border) Property Type Railroad NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 12/15/88) Received 7/30/09) Representative Site Photo Westminster 5JF1762 5JF Allen Ditch Intersection at BNSF Railroad Milepost 9.8 Broomfield 5BF47 5BF47.3 BNSF Railroad Milepost to 18.0 (from county border to border) Irrigation Ditch Railroad Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment Non- Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/03) Segment Received 7/30/09) May 2010

16 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Louisville 5BL2719 5BL Goodhue Ditch Milepost Property Type Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, considered eligible for the purposes of Section 106 Segment Non- Received 7/30/09) Representative Site Photo Louisville 5BF114 5BF114.3 (formerly part of 5BL2719) Goodhue Ditch BNSF Milepost Irrigation Ditch Eligible Linear Resource, considered eligible for the purposes of Section 106 Segment Non- Received 7/30/09) May

17 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Louisville/ Boulder/ Longmont Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address 5BL400 NA BNSF Railroad Milepost 18.0 to Property Type Railroad NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 3/28/05) Representative Site Photo Louisville 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Highline Lateral Ditch Segment Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Davidson Ditch Segment May 2010

18 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Property Type Railroad Bridge over Marshallville Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Segment Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over South Boulder Canyon Ditch Segment Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over New Dry Creek Ditch Segment May

19 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Property Type Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Railroad Bridge over Cottonwood #2 Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Segment Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Wellman Feeder Canal Segment Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Boulder and Whiterock (Beasley) Ditch Segment May 2010

20 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Property Type Railroad Bridge over Four Mile Canyon Creek NRHP Eligibility Criteria Segment Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Dry Creek Segment Longmont 5BL400 5BL BNSF Railroad Milepost Railroad Bridge over Left Hand Creek Segment May

21 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Boulder 5BL453 5BL453.5 Davidson Ditch Milepost Property Type Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criteria A and C (NRHP Eligible, 12/05) Segment Non Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL5042 5BL Marshalville Ditch Milepost Boulder 5BL5041 5BL South Boulder Canyon Ditch Milepost Irrigation Ditch Irrigation Ditch Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment May 2010

22 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Boulder 5BL4165 5BL McGinn Ditch Milepost Property Type Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment Non- Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL4488 5BL Cottonwood #2 Ditch Milepost Boulder 5BL9576 5BL Wellman Feeder Canal Milepost Irrigation Ditch Irrigation Ditch Eligible Linear Resource, Criteria A and C (NRHP Eligible, 3/28/05) Segment Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment Received 7/30/09) May

23 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Boulder 5BL5820 5BL Boulder and Left Hand Ditch Milepost Property Type Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 2/20/06) Segment Non Representative Site Photo Boulder 5BL859 5BL Boulder and Whiterock (aka Beasley) Ditch Milepost Boulder 5BL859 5BL Boulder and Whiterock (aka Beasley) Ditch Milepost Irrigation Ditch Irrigation Ditch Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 11/27/01) Segment Eligible Linear Resource, Criterion A (NRHP Eligible, 11/27/01) Segment Non May 2010

24 TABLE HISTORIC PROPERTIES LISTED OR ELIGIBLE FOR LISTING IN THE NRHP IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Section Smithsonian Segment Historic Name/Address Louisville 5BL2730 5BL Highline Lateral Ditch Milepost Property Type Irrigation Ditch NRHP Eligibility Criteria Eligible Linear Resource, considered eligible for the purposes of Section 106 Segment Non- Received 7/30/09) Representative Site Photo Source: NWR Corridor Project Team, May

25 Impact Evaluation Historic Resources Similar to other Chapter 3 sections, impacts to historic resources are broken down into the following categories: 1. NWR Corridor Alignment Impacts that would result from the project north of the South Westminster/71 st Avenue Station to Longmont. 2. Proposed Stations Impacts that would result from the proposed station platforms and associated park-n-rides. Both funded and unfunded stations are included in the impact analysis. Impacts associated with the South Westminster/71 st Avenue Station are included in Phase 1, because this station would be constructed as part of Phase Phase 1 Impacts that would result from acquisitions for the project between Denver Union Station (DUS) and the South Westminster/71 st Avenue Station. Phase 1 would be constructed first, as part of RTD s Eagle P3 4 project. No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative assumes that existing and committed improvements, as defined in Chapter 2.0, Alternatives Considered, would be implemented by others as planned. Direct, Indirect, Temporary Construction, and Cumulative Impacts It is anticipated that historic properties may be impacted by some or all of the roadway and transit projects identified under the No Action Alternative. These projects would most likely result in direct, indirect, temporary construction, and cumulative impacts. The extent of these impacts will be evaluated in the environmental documents being prepared for these projects. Preferred Alternative Direct Impacts Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would directly impact NRHP-eligible or listed properties (or segments of linear resources) as summarized in Table The Eagle P3 Project is RTD s planned project to construct the East Corridor and Gold Line projects through a design/build process May 2010

26 TABLE SUMMARY OF IMPACTS AND ADVERSE EFFECTS TO NRHP-ELIGIBLE OR LISTED PROPERTIES AND LINEAR RESOURCES PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Direct Impacts 2 Preferred Alternative Indirect Impacts Resulting in Finding of Adverse Effect 3 NWR Corridor Alignment Proposed Stations Phase Total Source: NWR Corridor Project Team, Notes: 1 Alignment impacts to historic resources from DUS to the South Westminster/71 st Avenue Station and the footprint associated with the South Westminster/71 st Avenue Station are included under Phase 1. 2 Some linear resources cross the corridor at multiple locations and would be impacted more than once. 3 Impacts and effects presented are preliminary. Formal consultation between USACE, SHPO, and the consulting parties will result in the final determination of effect. 4 Both Adverse Effects (5DV3512 and 5AM1885/5DV6243) are to historic properties analyzed through the Gold Line project. All mitigations have been fully resolved through the MOA between RTD, FTA, and the SHPO. No additional Adverse Effects have been identified for properties surveyed and analyzed through the Northwest Rail EE. Figure identifies the general location of linear resources, segments of linear resources, and architectural historic properties that are impacted by the Preferred Alternative. May

27 FIGURE LINEAR HISTORIC RESOURCES (AND SEGMENTS) AND ARCHITECTURAL HISTORIC PROPERTIES IMPACTED BY THE PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE Sources: NWR Corridor Project Team, ; DRCOG, 2008; Colorado Department of Transportation, 2006; ESRI SDC, May 2010

28 NWR Corridor Alignment Denver Section Discussion of the Denver Section is included under Phase 1. Adams Section BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5AM1888) The BNSF Railway Company railroad (5AM1888) crosses both Phase 1 and the NWR Corridor Alignment. This linear resource may be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. The addition of commuter rail to the existing freight rail corridor would include the addition of new rail, hardware, and ballast. The existing freight rail line would be shifted (within the railroad alignment) up to 10 feet along the approximately 4 mile linear resource. Shifting would allow sufficient space to construct the second track adjacent to the existing track. The tracks would remain along the existing rail alignment and historic railroad operations would continue. As a standard part of rail maintenance, the freight rail and other rail features are continually upgraded, replaced, or moved by the railroad. The resource s integrity of materials, workmanship, and design has already been lost due to regular rail maintenance and upgrading. The integrity of association, feeling, and setting would remain intact. There would be No Adverse Effect to the BNSF Railway Company railroad (5AM1888); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Westminster Section BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5JF519) The BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5JF519) may be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. The addition of commuter rail to the existing freight rail corridor would include the addition of new rail, hardware, and ballast. Under the Preferred Alternative, the track would remain in its current location and would not be shifted. The tracks would remain along the existing rail alignment and the historic railroad operations would continue. As a standard part of rail maintenance, the freight rail and other rail features are continually upgraded, replaced, or moved by the railroad. The resource s integrity of materials, workmanship, and design has already been lost due to regular rail maintenance and upgrading. The linear resource currently retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the impacts to this resource. There would be No Adverse Effect to the BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5JF519); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Allen Ditch (5JF1762, 5JF1762.3) The Preferred Alternative may directly impact this segment of the Allen Ditch. The existing freight rail line already crosses this resource at this location. Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would require lengthening the box culvert to accommodate a second track (approximately 20 feet). No other elements of the ditch would be impacted. The replacement of the culvert in 1982 has already compromised this ditch segment. However, the entire linear resource (5JF1762) retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. There would be No Adverse Effect to the Allen Ditch (5JF1762); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Broomfield Section BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5BF47, 5BF47.3) This segment of the BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5BF47.3) may be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. The addition of commuter rail to the existing freight rail corridor May

29 would include the addition of new rail, hardware, and ballast. The existing freight rail line would be shifted (within the railroad alignment) up to 10 feet along the approximately 5-mile segment. Shifting would allow sufficient space to construct the second track adjacent to the existing track. The tracks would remain along the existing rail alignment and historic railroad operations would continue. As a standard part of rail maintenance, the freight rail and other rail features are continually upgraded, replaced, or moved by the railroad. The resource s integrity of materials, workmanship, and design has already been lost due to regular rail maintenance and upgrading. The linear resource currently retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the impacts to this resource. There would be No Adverse Effect to the BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5BF47); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Louisville Section Goodhue Ditch (5BL2719, 5BL ) The Preferred Alternative may directly impact this segment of the Goodhue Ditch (5BL ). The existing freight rail line currently crosses this resource at this location. Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would require lengthening the existing box culvert to accommodate a second track. This action would occupy more area within the ditch (approximately 26 feet). No other impacts to the ditch would be anticipated. The integrity of this segment (5BL ) of the ditch has been diminished by construction of the current modern concrete box culvert. However, the entire linear resource (5BL2719) retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. There would be No Adverse Effect to the Goodhue Ditch (5BL2719); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Goodhue Ditch (5BF114, 5BF114.3) The Preferred Alternative may directly impact this segment of the Goodhue Ditch (5BF114.3). The existing freight rail line currently crosses this resource at this location. Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would require replacing the existing bridge over the ditch with a concrete box culvert to accommodate a second track. This action would occupy more area within the ditch (approximately 20 feet). No other impacts to the ditch would be anticipated. The integrity of this segment (5BL114.3) of the ditch has been diminished by construction of the current modern concrete crossing. However, the entire linear resource (5BL114) retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. There would be No Adverse Effect to the Goodhue Ditch (5BF114); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Louisville, Boulder, and Longmont Sections BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5BL400, 5BL400.21, 5BL400.22, 5BL400.23, 5BL400.24, 5BL400.25, 5BL400.26, 5BL400.27, 5BL400.30, 5BL400.31, 5BL400.34, 5BL400.35) The BNSF Railway Company Railroad (5BL400) may be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. The addition of commuter rail to the existing freight rail corridor would include the addition of new rail, hardware, and ballast. The existing freight rail line would be shifted (within the railroad alignment) up to 10 feet along the approximately 26 mile linear resource. Shifting would allow sufficient space to construct the second track adjacent to the existing track. The tracks would remain along the existing rail alignment and historic railroad operations would continue. As a standard part of rail maintenance, the freight rail and other rail features are May 2010

30 continually upgraded, replaced, or moved by the railroad. The resource s integrity of materials, workmanship, and design has already been lost due to regular rail maintenance and upgrading. The linear resource currently retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the impacts to this resource. The Preferred Alternative may directly impact multiple segments of the BNSF Railway Company Railroad that support the overall eligibility of the linear resource (5BL400). Each segment is a railroad crossing of various irrigation ditches, Four Mile Canyon Creek, Dry Creek, and Lefthand Creek. Impacts to each segment are described below. 5BL This segment (5BL400.21) is an existing crossing over the Highline Ditch consisting of steel and wooden rails that span between two concrete abutments. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.22) is an existing bridge over the Davidson Ditch consisting of steel and wooden rails that span between two concrete abutments over a concrete channel. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.23) is an existing bridge over the Marshallville Ditch consisting of steel and wooden rails that span between two concrete abutments. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. May

31 5BL This segment (5BL400.24) is an existing bridge over the South Boulder Canyon Ditch consisting of steel and wooden rails that span between two concrete abutments. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.25) is an existing culvert over the New Dry Creek Ditch consisting of a concrete and stone structure that supports the rail bed and rail line above it. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.26) is an existing bridge over the Cottonwood #2 Ditch consisting of wooden beams that span between concrete abutments and additional railroad ties. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a concrete box culvert to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.27) is an existing bridge over the Wellman Feeder Canal consisting of a concrete bridge with seven aqueducts to allow water to pass under the bridge. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with four concrete box culverts to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.30) is an existing bridge over the Boulder and Whiterock (Beasley) Ditch consisting of wooden beams that span between two concrete abutments. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a new bridge to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The May 2010

32 historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.31) is an existing bridge over the Fourmile Canyon Creek consisting of concrete and wooden abutments with wooden beams spanning the creek. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a new bridge to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.34) is an existing bridge over Dry Creek consisting of a wooden trestle structure with wooden supports and abutments. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a new bridge to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. 5BL This segment (5BL400.35) is an existing bridge over Left Hand Creek consisting of a wooden trestle structure. The crossing supports the eligibility of linear railroad resource. The crossing would be directly impacted by the Preferred Alternative. Construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossing with a new bridge to accommodate two tracks. Replacement of the crossing would not reduce the integrity of the linear resource as a whole. The existing rail alignment would remain intact. The historic use as a rail corridor would remain unchanged. The BNSF Railway Company railroad currently retains integrity of association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the project. The construction of the Preferred Alternative would require replacement of the existing crossings as described above, however the resource s integrity of materials, workmanship, and design have already been lost due to regular rail maintenance, upgrading, and replacement. The historic rail use would remain unchanged and the entire linear resource (5BL400) retains integrity of location, association, feeling, and setting, and none of these would be diminished by the impacts to these contributing segments. There would be No Adverse Effect to the BNSF Railway Company railroad (5BL400); SHPO concurred with this determination on February 19, Davidson Ditch (5BL453, 5BL453.5) The Preferred Alternative may directly impact this segment of the Davidson Ditch (5BL453.5). The existing freight rail line currently crosses this resource at this location. Implementation of the Preferred Alternative would require replacing the existing ditch culvert/bridge with a concrete box culvert to accommodate a second track. This action would occupy more area within the ditch (approximately 60 feet). No other impacts to the ditch May