HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Dendy, John" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 19 Oct 1999 16:38:38 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (20 lines)
This really poses a fascinating problem. As the archeologist in charge of
managing sites in a large historic district (two architects and our cultural
resources manager handle the buildings), I forsee real problems with this
nomination. The first is the nomination process itself. One wonders whether
the GSA has fully realized the difficulty of nominating a district these
days. They might well be better off nominating individual properties before
a transfer. Documenting the entire district to modern nomination standards
is a major investment in time and money. (Not to mention the lengthy review
process associated with nominations).The second is the problem of
transferring property to a non-federal entity under the new Section 106
process which requires covenanting of the properties. This could be a longer
process than the former as the consultations progress. Of course, they could
look into making it a landmark, sending it to the NPS, and let Congress deal
with the problem.

John H. Dendy
Archeologist
Dynamac Corporation
Fort Reiley, KS

ATOM RSS1 RSS2