The National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA) is a federal law governing stewardship of our nation’s cultural heritage. Section 106 of the NHPA establishes a process for considering a project’s effects on historic properties. The Tier 2 Study is required to comply with Section 106. This will include consultation with the Maryland Historical Trust, government agencies, Federally recognized tribes, other preservation organizations, and the public.
The Section 106 process includes four main steps: Initiate, Identify Historic Properties, Assess Effects, Resolve Adverse Effects to historic properties.
What is a Historic Property? Section 106 defines a historic property as any site, district, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (National Register).
The MDTA is completing survey and evaluation of architectural and archaeological resources to identify historic properties within the study limits.
To date, 36 historic properties have been identified within the study limits, including:
- Asbury M.E. Church and Cemetery (Broad Neck)
- Barnstable Hill, Lowery Farm
- Belle Vue (Blue Bay Farm)
- Charles Stevens Store
- Chesapeake Bay Bridge (William Preston Lane Jr. Memorial Bridge)
- Christ Church
- Cray House
- Dutch Mill Farm Restaurant (Old Mill Pancake House)
- Eareckson House (Nathan Morris House)
- Ford House and Garage
- Gillis House
- Holly Beach Farm
- J.H. Tolson Store
- John Benton House
- Lowery's Hotel
- Manresa
- Matapeake Ferry Terminal, Club House, Shop
- Piney Narrows Yacht Haven
- Sandy Point Shoal Light Station
- Sandy Point State Park
- Severn Crest
- SHA Bridge No. 1700600
- Skidmore
- Stevensville Bank
- Stevensville Country Store
- Stevensville Historic District
- Stevensville Post Office (Dr. J.E.H. Lewis Office)
- Turner House (Dr. J.E.H. Lewis House)
- Westinghouse Ocean Research and Engineering Center (Westinghouse Oceanic Division)
- Whitehall
- White's Heritage (Stoopley-Gibson)
- William E. Denny Farm
- Woodlyn Farm
- Three archaeological sites
The MDTA prepared a cultural resources gap analysis technical report to identify the gap between previous investigations and the additional research, survey, and evaluation needed to identify historic properties as required under Section 106.
An ArcGIS Online (AGOL) map displays all architectural resources surveyed and evaluated to date as part the Bay Crossing Study. All architectural resources that have been surveyed and evaluated to date, can be accessed at online using the MTDA’s AGOL tool.
MDTA completed a historic context study, Suburbanization Historic Context Addendum (1890-1990): Anne Arundel and Queen Anne’s Counties, Maryland. This context was used to evaluate architectural resources using consistent criteria.
As a first step in identifying archaeological historic properties and as recommended in the Gap Analysis, the MDTA conducted an archaeological survey of the state right-of-way along the US 50/301 corridor, the results of which are presented to the public in a redacted archaeological technical report. Following the identification of alternatives retained for detailed study (ARDS), the MDTA will conduct archaeological surveys within any areas common to all alternatives not previously surveyed.
The MDTA will assess effects of the project on historic properties. An adverse effect occurs when a project diminishes the characteristics of a property that make it historic. Not all changes to a historic property constitute an adverse effect. Criteria for adverse effect findings are found in the Section 106 implementing regulations. Adverse effects may include actions such as replacing a historic bridge, removing historic materials from a historic building or streetscape, or destruction of an archaeological site. For more information, visit Maryland State Highway Administration’s Citizens’ Guide to Section 106 Consultation in Maryland.
Sometimes adverse effects cannot be avoided or minimized. If the project has an adverse effect on historic properties, the MDTA will work with consulting parties to identify mitigation that is reasonable, feasible, and commensurate with the adverse effects of the project. The mitigation commitments would be specified in an agreement document. The agreement document may specify ongoing roles for consulting parties, who may be invited to concur by signing the final agreement.
Consulting parties include the Maryland Historical Trust (the Maryland State Historic Preservation Office), Federally recognized Indian tribes, local governments, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and other individuals/organizations with a demonstrated interest in the project. Consulting party status allows participants to share their views related to historic properties and review Section 106 consultation materials.