Relocation of Jeanne d'Arc Statue, Place de France, New Orleans, Louisiana

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of the Secretary

Relocation of Jeanne d'Arc Statue, Place de France, New Orleans,

Louisiana

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, Interior.

ACTION: Notice--Record of Decision.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Mayor of the City of New Orleans, Marc. H. Morial,

requested that the Secretary of the Interior approve the relocation of

the Place de France, including a statue of Jeanne d'Arc and two bronze

cannons, now located between the International Trade Mart Building and

the former Rivergate, to a new location in the Vieux Carre (the French

Quarter), a National Historic Landmark District. After carefully

reviewing the effects of this request, the Secretary of the Interior,

pursuant to Section 705 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of

1970, Public Law 91-609 (the Act), approved this request on June 4,

1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Geraldine Smith, Superintendent,

Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve, 365 Canal Street,

Suite 2400, New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-1142. (504) 589-3882.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

In 1971, the City applied for grant funds to develop the park

currently known as the Place de France (and also the Joan of Arc Plaza)

under the Act. The Place contains a gilded bronze statue of Jeanne

d'Arc and two bronze cannons manufactured during the Napoleonic Empire

donated to the City by the French Government. The City constructed the

Place de France in 1972 with these grant funds. Section 705 of the Act

states, ``[n]o open-space land involving historic or architectural

purposes for which assistance has been granted under this title shall

be converted to use for any other purpose without the prior approval of

the Secretary of the Interior.'' In Louisiana Landmarks Society, Inc.

v. City of New Orleans, No. 94-3880 (E.D. La. 1995), rev'd on other

grounds, 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir. 1996), the Court found that

Section 705 applied to the Place de France. Therefore, the approval of

the Secretary must be granted prior to change of use of the Place de

France.

The question of what regulatory framework must be applied to the

request for approval of the Secretary of the relocation was raised by

the Louisiana Landmarks Society (letter dated April 17, 1999). No

regulations presently exist that implement Section 705 of the Act. In

deleting regulations that existed prior to 1982, HUD explained that

``[to] the extent that there are still ongoing projects remaining under

these programs, they continue to be governed by the requirements of the

enabling legislation under which they were funded since those statutes

remain in effect, as well as the obligations under the respective grant

and/or loan contracts with HUD.'' 47 FR 1117 (January, 1982), see also,

Louisiana Landmarks Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, Etc. Civ. No.

94-3880 (E.D. La 1994), rev. on other grounds Louisiana Landmarks

Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, Etc. 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir.

1996).

The Louisiana Landmarks Society suggests that the Secretary look to

HUD's repealed regulations for guidance on what issues the Secretary

must consider, prior to making his decision. However, the repealed

regulations did not set forth any standard that the Secretary should

follow in making his decision under the Act. Therefore, the repealed

regulations provide no guidance to the Secretary.

The Louisiana Landmarks Society suggests, in the alternative, that

the Secretary should look to the Land and Water Conservation Act (LWCF)

rules on conversion and apply those standards in making his decision.

However, the LWCF rules are not applicable in this situation. The LWCF

specifically requires the Secretary to consider specific issues prior

to making his determination approving or denying a conversion request

for conversion of properties funded by that particular program. See, 16

U.S.C. 460l-8(f)(3) (``No property acquired or developed with

assistance under this section shall, without the approval of the

Secretary, be converted to other than public outdoor recreation uses.

The Secretary shall approve such conversion only if he finds it to be

in accord with the then existing comprehensive statewide outdoor

recreation plan and only upon such conditions as he deems necessary to

assure the substitution of other recreation properties of at least

equal fair substitution of other recreation properties of at least

equal fair market value and of reasonably equivalent usefulness and

locations * * *'') However, the Act is a distinct funding statute with

a unique statutory framework. Applying the recreational standards of

the LWCF to this HUD urban grant program would be inappropriate.

The plain language of the Act grants the Secretary the authority to

make his approval decision in his discretion. Further, this decision is

informed by compliance with all other applicable laws. Specifically,

the Secretary considers the effects of the relocation on the

environment, the Vieux Carre Historic District, and the Place itself.

Although the Secretary has noted the local planning process, the

Secretary's

[[Page 31870]]

decision is not based on an evaluation of the appropriateness of that

process or on any other decisions made at the local level, nor does it

purport to comply with the mandates or responsibilities of any other

federal agency. This decision merely responds to a specific request

made by the City, and is made solely in accordance with Section 705 of

the Act.

In making this decision, the Secretary considered the effects of

the relocation on the environment, the historic district, and the Place

itself. Due to construction adjacent to the Place de France, the City,

by letter dated October 29, 1998 from Mayor Marc H. Morial, requested

that the Secretary approve relocation of the Place, the statue and the

cannons from the current location to the Decatur Street/North Peters

Street Triangle in the French Quarter.

On February 18, 1999, although not required by law, the Department

of the Interior published notice of the request of the City of New

Orleans for the Secretary's approval of the proposed relocation for a

thirty day public comment period. 64 FR 8110. In response to a request

from the public, the Department extended the public comment period by

fifteen days through April 6, 1999. 64 FR 14936. Approximately 220

individuals, organizations or public bodies responded. Of these

responses, 191 were from individuals who signed or drafted identical

petitions.

Summary of Comments Received

Historic Preservation Issues

Several of the commentators raised questions as to the eligibility

of the Place, including the Jeanne d'Arc statue, for inclusion on the

National Register of Historic Places. To address this concern, the

Department made a request to the Keeper of the National Register for a

determination of eligibility of the Place, including the Jeanne d'Arc

statute, in compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act of

1966, as amended.

On April 12, 1999, the Keeper determined that neither the Place de

France, nor the Jeanne d'Arc statue, was eligible for inclusion in the

National Register. The Keeper noted that the Place is associated with

the special relationship between New Orleans and France, and that the

statue itself ``is clearly an important work of art.'' However, neither

the relationship, nor the statue met the basic requirements for

Register eligibility. The Keeper's decision addresses an issue that was

not resolved in the underlying litigation. In Louisiana Landmarks

Society, Inc. v. City of New Orleans, No.94-3880 (E.D. La. 1995), rev'd

on other grounds, 85 F.3d 1119 (5th Cir. 1996), the court found only

that the property had ``historic purposes'' under the Act.

The Keeper additionally noted that ``the integrity of both the

Place de France and the Jeanne d'Arc statue has been compromised by

recent changes'' and that the Place de France has been ``seriously

impacted by the adjacent construction.''

According to the Mayor, the relocation site for the Place was

identified by the staff of the City Planning Commission in consultation

with the staff of the City's Arts Council. In selecting this site, the

City took into consideration the following seven factors: (1) urban

prominence; (2) scale/urban context; (3) visibility as a deterrent to

potential vandalism; (4) pedestrian and vehicular safety; (5)

suitability for designated functions; (6) stated wishes of identified

interest groups; and (7) favorable comparison to the previous

installation. In selecting this site, the City consulted with the

French community in the City, with Consul General Mme. Lenoir-Bertrand

and with Ambassador Francois Bujon de L'Estang. Additionally, the Vieux

Carre Commission, with review and approval authority of all

architectural and design actions in the Vieux Carre, unanimously

approved the proposed relocation site at a public meeting on March 16,

1999.

Because the City's identified relocation site for the Place,

including the Jeanne d'Arc statue, was within the Vieux Carre Historic

District, the Department evaluated the effect of the relocation on the

District. The Department consulted with the Advisory Council on

Historic Preservation as required by Section 106 of the National

Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended, and 36 CFR Part 800. The

National Park Service determined that the effect of the project on the

District would not be adverse. Both the Louisiana State Historic

Preservation Officer (by letter dated April 28, 1999) and the Advisory

Council on Historic Preservation (by letter dated May 4, 1999)

concurred with this determination.

Environmental Issues

To identify and analyze potential environmental effects of the

proposed action, the Department prepared an Environmental Assessment

(EA) in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act. On April

30, 1999, a notice of availability of the EA was published in the

Federal Register. 64 FR 23354. A notice of the availability of the EA

was published in the local New Orleans newspaper, the Times-Picayune,

beginning Tuesday, May 4, 1999 and running for three days. And the

Department additionally sent notice directly to individuals who

provided comments to the Secretary earlier. Interested parties were

given the opportunity to submit any comments on the EA for thirty days

from publication of availability of the EA. The last day for comments

on the Environmental Assessment was June 1, 1999. The National Park

Service received less than 10 comments on the EA.

The comments received and considered by the National Park Service

included those comments received in response to the Federal Register

notices of February 18 (the petitioners) and April 28, 1999 (the

respondents). These comments or concerns fell into several general

categories: (1) Cultural resources; (2) the current Place de France

location; (3) the proposed Place de France location; (4) Harrah's

Casino; and (5) general comments.

With reference to the cultural resources there was one comment to

the April 28 Federal Register notice which asked about the status of

the current Place de France and the Jeanne d'Arc statue for listing in

the National Register. The Keeper of the National Register of Historic

Places issued a formal determination that neither the current Place de

France nor the statue were eligible for the National Register.

The current Place de France location drew comments from the

petitioners and three respondents to the April 28 notice in the Federal

Register. The petitioners expressed a preference for the current Place

de France because of the contributions of Samuel Wilson, a New Orleans

architect and preservationist. The Keeper of the National Register said

that notwithstanding the importance of Mr. Wilson, properties less than

fifty years old, which this property is, must be shown to be

exceptionally important to be eligible for listing in the National

Register. The Place de France does not meet this test. Three

respondents to the April 28 notice opined that the current Place de

France is a better location to commemorate international trade and

commerce. However, no supporting data was presented to support this

position and the National Park Service found this position

unpersuasive.

The proposed Place de France generated the most comments. Five

respondents to the April 28 notice in the Federal Register found the

proposed location in the Vieux Carre to be more aesthetically pleasing

for display of the statue. One respondent said that there were multiple

locations in the Vieux Carre, including the proposed location, that

would be preferable to the current

[[Page 31871]]

location. Six respondents found the Vieux Carre preferable to

commemorate the French heritage of New Orleans. Additionally in a

letter prior to the February 18 notice in the Federal Register the

French Ambassador expressed the same opinion. One respondent was

concerned about the possible deleterious effects of air pollution on

the statue. The National Park Service has no substantive information

indicating that the Vieux Carre location would be more damaging than

the current location. It was also noted that New Orleans currently

meets all National Ambient Air Quality Standards. Finally, the

petitioners and six respondents raised concerns about safety at the

proposed location. However, no evidence was presented that suggested

that the relocated Place would attract large crowds of visitors,

causing significant impacts to the new location. Furthermore, the City

has committed to taking appropriate safety measures on those days that

large crowds may be anticipated, such as Bastille Day. Thus, the

National Park Service found these concerns to be adequately addressed

if large crowds of visitors were ever to occur.

Harrah's Casino was also a topic that generated comment by both the

petitioners and four respondents. These parties expressed

dissatisfaction with the location of the casino and the role it has

played in the proposed relocation of the Place de France. The National

Park Service properly noted that the role of the casino on decisions of

the city of New Orleans is not an issue before the Department of the

Interior. Likewise the location of the casino is not a consideration of

the Department of the Interior. We do note, however, that the casino

has agreed to pay all costs associated with relocation of the Place de

France, the statue and cannon to the Vieux Carre.

Finally, there were numerous comments that are difficult to

categorize. First, the petitioners and two respondents expressed

concern that the current Place de France had already been badly damaged

during the demolition of the Rivergate complex. The National Park

Service acknowledged the fact that the site was partially demolished

when the city of New Orleans attempted to move the statue in 1994 but

noted that the cannon and were not damaged. Also the National Park

Service pointed out that nothing was damaged that cannot be replaced or

redesigned at the Vieux Carre location. Second the petitioners and

three respondents challenged the adequacy of the City's rationale to

relocate Place de France. The National Park Service correctly pointed

out that the only question before the Department of the Interior is the

proposed move, not the rationale for the move. Third, there were

questions about the regulatory framework under which the Secretary

would make a decision on the City's request. The National Park

Service's response was similar to the discussion on this same issue

provided earlier in this Record of Decision. Lastly, nine respondents

asked about reviews and approvals by various local agencies. The

National Park Service referenced the respondents to the site selection

process employed by the New Orleans Planning Commission and Arts

Council and the approval of the Vieux Carre Commission.

The National Park Service issued a Finding of No Significant Impact

(FONSI) on the proposed relocation on June 3, 1999, finding that the

Secretary's approval of the request of the City does not constitute a

major Federal action significantly affecting the human environment.

Dated: June 4, 1999.

Robert J. Lamb,

Acting Assistant Secretary for Policy Management and Budget.

[FR Doc. 99-15018 Filed 6-11-99; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-70-P