Section 5

	INTRODUCTION THE BRIDGE OF LIONS ST. AUGUSTINE HISTORIC DISTRICT CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS BRIDGE OF LIONS PARK		AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVES AVOIDANCE TO BRIDGE OF LIONS Alternate Corridors No-Build Alternative Rehabilitation Option 1A (Preferred) AVOIDANCE TO BRIDGE OF LIONS PARK SUMMARY OF AVOIDANCE ALTERNATIVES
	PROJECT IMPACTS ST. AUGUSTINE HISTORIC DISTRICT CASTILLO DE SAN MARCOS BRIDGE OF LIONS BRIDGE OF LIONS PARK Lion Statues
			MEASURES TO MINIMIZE HARM TO BRIDGE OF LIONS TO BRIDGE OF LIONS PARK
			COORDINATION STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION OFFICER (SHPO) MEETINGS CITY OF ST. AUGUSTINE COORDINATION PUBLIC MEETINGS

Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act of 1966 (Title 49 USC Section 1653(f) and Title 23 USC Section 138) as amended, applies to both the Federal Highway Administration and the U.S. Coast Guard and reads as follows: “It is hereby declared to be the national policy that special effort should be made to preserve the natural beauty of the countryside and public parks and recreation lands, wildlife and waterfowl refuges, and historic sites. The Secretary of Transportation shall cooperate and consult with the Secretaries of the Interior, Housing and Urban Development, and Agriculture, and with the States in developing transportation plans and programs that include measures to maintain or enhance the natural beauty of the lands traversed . . . the Secretary shall not approve any program or project which requires the use of any publicly owned land from a public park, recreation area, or wildlife and waterfowl refuge of national, State, or local significance as determined by the Federal, State or local officials having jurisdiction thereof, or any land from a historic site of National, State, or local significance as determined by such officials unless (1) there is no feasible and prudent alternative to the use of such land, and (2) such program includes all possible planning to minimize harm to such [land].”

Within the project study limits four properties qualify as Section 4(f) resources. The existing Bridge of Lions, the St. Augustine Historic District, and the Castillo de San Marcos are all historic structures/areas. The Bridge of Lions Park is a public park.

As has been its trait since opening, the Bridge of Lions provides the only crossing of the Matanzas River in the immediate vicinity of historic St. Augustine and the northernmost access to Anastasia Island. It is a designated emergency evacuation route for Anastasia Island, providing a vital link to safety and emergency response plans for fire and rescue units. In 1927, the existing bridge replaced a wooden toll bridge that connected St. Augustine and Anastasia Island from 1895 to 1925. In 1982, the bridge was listed on the National Register of Historic Places because of its Mediterranean Revival architecture and its historical significance. A photograph of the existing bridge, Figure 3-4, can be found in Section 3 of this FEIS.

The structure is 1,545 feet (470.9 meters) long and has an overall deck width of 35 feet (10.7 meters). The “charted” horizontal navigational clearance is 76 feet (23.2 meters) which does not meet the recommended U.S. Coast Guard guide clearance. An illustration of the bridge’s typical section is provided in Section 1 of this FEIS as Figure 1-4. The bridge is currently owned and maintained by the FDOT.

The St. Augustine Historic District is a National Historic Landmark. Located west of the project, the forty-six block historic district extends over an area of approximately 113 acres (45.7 hectares). The district is bordered to the west by Cordova Street and Maria Sanchez Creek; to the north by the Castillo de San Marcos; to the east by the Matanzas River/Intracoastal Waterway; and to the south by St. Francis Street. The boundaries generally follow the original town plan of St. Augustine as it appeared in 1764 at the end of the First Spanish period.

The district comprises buildings reflecting a variety of uses, styles, materials, and several distinct periods of development. Properties within the district date from the sixteenth century through the early twentieth century and are mostly colonial or Spanish-influence in style. The district has lost some of its integrity due to poor maintenance, destruction and alteration, but overall it retains to a remarkable degree, the physical characteristics which convey its historic period of development. An illustration of the district boundaries is provided as Figure 5-1. The Bridge of Lions and the Bridge of Lions Park are not located within the boundaries of the District.

The oldest standing structure within the historic district is the Spanish fortress Castillo de San Marcos, a National Monument. Begun in 1672, the fort is the oldest existing masonry fort in the United States and is a unit of the National Park System. The fort is located north of the bridge and abuts the Matanzas River/Intracoastal Waterway, as shown on Figure 5-2, and is located within the St. Augustine Historic District. Access to the fort is gained from Castillo Drive (S.R. A1A). The fort and its surrounding green space encompass approximately 10 acres (4 hectares) of property.

The Bridge of Lions west approach intersects with the Bridge of Lions Park, dedicated by the city in 1986. As shown on Figure 5-3, this passive park includes arbors north and south of the bridge and is home to the two marble lions that give the bridge its name. A gift to the city, the lions guard the west end of the bridge on concrete bases. Sculpted in 1924 from high-quality Italian Carrera Marble by F. Romanelli of Florence, the lions are modeled after the pair guarding the Loggia Dei Lanzi in Florence. The 1 acre (0.40 hectares) landscaped park contains sidewalks, a sprinkler system, and planters around the marble lions and is owned and maintained by the City of St. Augustine. Access to the park is limited to pedestrians which use the sidewalks and benches on the park’s perimeter. Recent counts show that approximately 200 people per day walk on these sidewalks. The park affords a pleasant view to motorists and pedestrians traveling along the bay front or on the bridge. There are several other similar passive parks (i.e., Cathedral Park, etc.) in the immediate project vicinity which mainly serve pedestrians. None of these adjacent parks will be impacted by the proposed project.

The City of St. Augustine has said that there are no plans to upgrade or change any aspect of this park. With its well-manicured grounds and impressive lion statues, the Bridge of Lions Park is considered important to the community. This importance is attributed to its aesthetic values and its role as a pedestrian corridor.

The following discussion is of the project impacts to the aforementioned Section 4(f) properties. After thorough evaluation and receiving comments from the project’s Public Hearing, the Rehabilitation Option 1A has been selected as the Preferred Alternative. Option 1A maintains the existing 76 foot (23.1 meter) charted horizontal clearance (refer to Figure 2-9)and uses a temporary bridge for maintenance of traffic during construction. A detailed presentation of the Preferred Alternative and the other three build alternatives is located in Section 2 of this FEIS.

It has been determined that the Preferred Rehabilitation Option 1A will not affect the St. Augustine Historic District. Therefore, the project will not result in a “use,” as defined by 23 CFR 771.135, and Section 4(f) does not apply.

It has been determined that the Preferred Rehabilitation Option 1A will not have an effect on the Castillo de San Marcos. Therefore, the project will not result in a “use,” as defined by 23 CFR 771.135, and Section 4(f) does not apply.

As illustrated on Figure 2-9, the Preferred Rehabilitation Option 1A will retain the approach span arched steel-plate girders, the bascule piers, and the observation towers. The changes to the existing structure will be accomplished in an aesthetic manner similar to the existing bridge. In addition, components of the original bridge that have been removed during the years will be restored/replicated, where possible. Therefore, this option will not result in an adverse effect to the bridge nor will it alter the National Register eligibility of the bridge.

Short-term or temporary impacts to the Bridge of Lions Park will be experienced with the Preferred Rehabilitation Option 1A. Under this option, approximately 6,730 square feet (625 square meters) of the northernmost section of the park will be paved for the temporary bridge, shown on Figure 4-2. Due to the extent of the disruption to the park, it has been determined that a temporary “use” will occur with this alternative. However, upon completion of the rehabilitated Bridge of Lions and demolition of the temporary structure, the park will be returned to its original condition. The Preferred Alternative will maintain the existing alignment through the Bridge of Lions Park with only minor modifications to curb and sidewalk approaches. These modifications will not substantially change the function of the park and are therefore considered negligible impacts.

The Memorandum of Agreement between FHWA, FDOT, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the Florida State Historic Preservation Office stipulates that a restoration plan of the lion statues be developed in consultation with the SHPO. The restoration plan will include a technical plan for the restoration and information regarding the professional qualifications of the conservator. The final plan will be submitted to the SHPO for review and approval prior to implementation. Refer to Exhibit K in the Appendix.

Alternatives were developed and analyzed to determine the most practical scenario in maintaining the Bridge of Lions as a useable transportation facility. The analysis studied various avoidance alternatives: alternate corridor alignments and the No-Build Alternative.

As discussed in Section 2 of this FEIS, alternate corridors were considered unacceptable, both from an engineering standpoint and from the viewpoint of the citizenry. A corridor to the north would impact the Castillo de San Marcos and St. Augustine Historic District. A corridor to the south was considered cost prohibitive. It should be noted that if an alternate corridor was used, the bascule span of the existing bridge would require removal for navigational considerations. This removal would impact the historical and aesthetic qualities of the bridge. In order to develop an alternate corridor which would replace the function of the existing bridge, substantial impacts to the Historic District would be expected.

Another avoidance alternative is the No-Build or “do nothing” Alternative, discussed in detail in Section 2. This alternative would provide no restoration/rehabilitation, capacity, structural, safety or aesthetic improvements except for routine maintenance and repair. As a “do nothing” approach, this Alternative is inherently an avoidance measure. However, leaving the bridge in the existing condition would result in the continuation of increased maintenance needs and costs due to erosion. The normal process of deterioration would render the bridge an unacceptable safety risk to the local community, and would ultimately result in the loss of an important highway connection by denying access to Anastasia Island from downtown St. Augustine. This alternative does not meet the purpose and need of the project, and is therefore not considered prudent and feasible.

This Preferred Option was conceived to provide the necessary safety improvements to the bridge with little or no impact to its Section 4(f) standing. As discussed in more detail in Section 2, under this Option, the rehabilitation of the bridge will retain the approach span arched steel-plate girders, the bascule piers, and the observation towers intact. The approach spans’ piers, deck and railing, and the bascule span will, however, be replaced. Because the bascule piers will remain intact, however, the charted horizontal navigation clearance continues to function below the recommended U.S. Coast Guard guide clearance criteria.

The Preferred Alternative will result in temporary “use” of the Bridge of Lions Park. Only the No-Build (or “do nothing”) Alternative avoids this “use”. This temporary use is mainly associated with the detour bridge and approach which will be located in the park. Placing the detour bridge off park property in either direction is not prudent due to navigational considerations, costs, traffic operations, and safety. Even with the detour bridge adjusted, the Preferred Alternative will still result in a temporary “use”of this park caused by demolition of the bridge.

Alternate corridors were examined as avoidance alternatives to Bridge of Lions impacts. Each of the alternate alignments was found to have more significant Section 4(f) impacts because of the historic surroundings (i.e., Castillo de San Marcos and the historic district). The only alternative that completely avoids all Section 4(f) involvement is the No-Build Alternative. However, this alternative does not meet the project purpose and need and is therefore not considered a reasonable alternative. There are no prudent and feasible alternatives that do avoid all Section 4(f) involvement while meeting the project purpose and need. The Preferred Rehabilitation Option 1A is the only build alternative that provides avoidance to the Bridge of Lions itself.

While the Preferred Option 1A avoids impacts to the bridge, it still impacts another Section 4(f) property, the Bridge of Lions Park; but because of the proximity of the Section 4(f) historic district, avoiding the park would only lead to impacting the historic district. Either way, a Section 4(f) impact would occur.

After a thorough analysis, it has been determined that there are no reasonable alternatives that completely avoid all Section 4(f) involvement while meeting the purpose of and need for the project.

As part of the Memorandum of Agreement between FHWA, FDOT, The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the SHPO, recordation measures will be carried out during construction and accepted by the SHPO prior to any demolition, alteration, or rehabilitation activity affecting the Bridge of Lions or the marble lion statues. In addition, all rehabilitation designs and all associated new construction will be compatible with the historic and architectural qualities of the Bridge of Lions, and be consistent with the Secretary of Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (36 CFR Section 67.7, Revised 1990). All designs and specifications for the project will be developed in consultation with the Florida SHPO. Refer to Exhibit K in the Appendix.

The Bridge of Lions Park will be restored in a manner similar to the original 1927 condition after the removal of all temporary construction. There will be no permanent harm to the functions and attributes of this park.

As required by Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, coordination and consultation have been initiated with the SHPO. The Memorandum of Agreement between FHWA, FDOT, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the SHPO is included in Exhibit K.

Six meetings were held with the SHPO between March 1994 and September 1996. The following is a summary of events that took place.

The first meeting, held March 10, 1994, brought the SHPO up to-date with the study’s progress and to answer any questions the SHPO might have regarding the project alternatives.

The second meeting, held January 20, 1995, introduced the temporary bridge concept and its potential archaeological involvement with the river bottom. Also discussed, was a more extensive rehabilitation alternative. The SHPO felt the project team was making progress toward a compromise that would benefit the historical and business communities.

December 6, 1995 was the third meeting. This coordination meeting was held in conjunction with the U.S. Coast Guard to discuss the project and issues of concern. Coast Guard navigational concerns were addressed along with their request to widen the bascule span. Also discussed was the need to identify the point at which repairs to the bridge become an adverse effect for Section 106.

The fourth meeting, held February 1, 1996, was a coordination meeting; the objective being to gain a clearer understanding of the required documentation necessary to obtain location design approval. It was agreed the next meeting would involve the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the U.S. Coast Guard.

On April 4, 1996, the SHPO was given an update of the archaeological investigation conducted for the project. The SHPO indicated that no matter which alternative/option was selected, mitigation measures would be required. However, the SHPO strongly preferred Option 1A. This meeting included representatives from the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and the U.S. Coast Guard. The U.S. Coast Guard stated it will not permit any deficient navigational clearance (under current standards). The Advisory Council questioned the U.S. Coast Guard standard and thought FDOT should apply for an exception to the current navigational clearance standard.

The sixth meeting was held September 13, 1996 to update the SHPO on the project’s status. Drawings of the four build alternatives were submitted for review as were photographs showing the view of the historic district from the existing bridge and from a height simulating the proposed replacement bridge. The SHPO was informed that a DEIS was being prepared and would be presented for comment in the near future.

After the June 1999 Public Hearing, a Section 106 Consultation meeting was held June 2001 in Tallahassee and attended by officials from FDOT, FHWA, SHPO, and the “Save our Bridge” committee. A variety of topics were discussed including the preparation of a Memorandum of Agreement, as well as further research on the ballast pile site. The subject of the lions statues was also discussed.

On April 11, 1997, a meeting was held with the Assistant City Manager of the City of St. Augustine. The build alternatives and their potential impacts to the Bridge of Lions Park were discussed. Exhibit A documents the City’s review of the FDOT’s evaluation of the impacts associated with the park. Upon final alternative selection, the provision of Section 4(f) and 36 CFR 800 will be fully satisfied.

Since May 1991, seven public meetings have been held for this project. All meetings from July 1994 onward were transcribed for the official record. The May 1991 meeting presented an overview of the project’s history and a statement of issues and concerns regarding the historic structure. In June 1992, a meeting was held to address the traffic analysis and the two lane versus four lane options (see FEIS Section 2). The third public meeting was held July 1993. At this meeting, findings and alternatives from the Rehabilitation Report were presented. The fourth meeting of the series was held one year later in July 1994. At this meeting, two specific alternatives were presented: a rehabilitation alternative using one-lane for maintenance of traffic during construction; and a new two lane structure. The fifth meeting, held March 1995, presented the temporary bridge concept for maintenance of traffic during construction. A more extensive rehabilitation alternative was also presented.

The sixth meeting, was held in June 1996 at which the four build alternatives discussed in this FEIS were presented. The project’s Public Hearing, held in June 1999, was held to present the Draft Environmental Impact Statement. At this hearing, the Rehabilitation Alternative options (Option 1A and Option 1B) and the Replacement Alternative options (Option 2A and Option 2B) were presented and the public was given the opportunity for comment. The U.S. Coast Guard and FDOT held this joint meeting.