|
FREQUENTLY
ASKED QUESTIONS
What is a General Management Plan
Amendment and a Development Concept Plan?
Planning is a decision making process. In the National Park Service,
a combined General Management Plan Amendment (GMP) and Development Concept
Plan (DCP) are used to create a future vision for the park and establish
a practical framework for decision making. The completed GMP amendment
and DCP at Chalmette Battlefield and National Cemetery will describe how
to best protect park resources, provide quality visitor experiences, manage
visitation and visitor use, and serve as a blueprint for future park development.
The objective of this plan is to define a range of different resource
conditions and visitor experiences that could be maintained at the park.
The alternative development process will focus on park-wide concepts,
each having a different underlying cohesive rationale and or philosophy
that shapes a vision for visitor experiences and resource conditions.
Each management alternative will identify the range, extent and location
of resource conditions and visitor experiences that would be provided
under that alternative.
Up to four (three new plus one existing conditions) distinct alternative management
concepts will be described in both written and graphic format. The existing
condition (no action) alternative will describe current resource conditions/trends
and current visitor experiences/trends, providing the baseline for comparing
other alternatives.
Based on information gathered during the scoping process, site visits,
and design workshops or charettes, a preliminary schematic site design
will be produced for each (up to 3) management alternatives. These designs
will provide, in general detail, a clear understanding of the major site
infrastructure proposed in each management alternative.
Preliminary site designs are likely to contain the following elements:
- A plan graphic (map) that communicates the designs most important
aspects in a way that is readily understandable to non-technical persons
- Pedestrian and vehicular circulation patterns and entrances
- Location and approximate size of existing and proposed roads, parking
areas, walks, and trails
- Location and approximate size of existing and proposed buildings or
facilities
- The addition or removal of grasses, shrub masses, trees, or other
vegetation
- Location and approximate size of existing and proposed ADA accessible
pathways and bridges
- Locations of existing and proposed fences and walls
- Locations of existing and proposed overhead and underground utilities
- Locations of existing and proposed earthen berms, swales, and canals
- A "Class C" cost estimate
It is important to note the emphasis on schematic design. The intent
of the proposed plan is to communicate ideas rather than prepare construction
ready documents or specifications.
What are other stakeholders saying about the site?
The NPS planning team spent much of 2004 gathering information about park resources, park visitors, and the surrounding community. Hundreds of helpful suggestions were received from park staff, the Chalmette Battlefield Task Force, local and state government officials, tribal governments, and park stakeholders.The following paragraphs summarize many of the comments and suggestions we heard during the information gathering phase of our planning process.
Park Entrances on St. Bernard Highway
Stakeholders almost unanimously agree that the Battlefield and Cemetery vehicle entrances on St. Bernard Highway need significant upgrades. Recommended improvements include new landscaping, redesigned walls/fences/gates, accent lighting, and an appropriate entrance sign. Because both entrances cross an active rail spur, potential improvements must never impair the visibility of train engineers or the ability of trains to cross the site safely.
Visitor Center
Stakeholders were very clear that they feel the existing visitor center is inadequate. Construction of a new facility at a different location or expansion of the existing structure were both suggested as possible solutions. The need for a new or expanded facility was most often justified by the desire to provide additional indoor space for interpretive displays, program staging, classroom activities, meetings, bookstore, and administrative office space.
Historic Character of Battlefield
Current conditions on the Battlefield bear little resemblance to conditions on the day of the battle. While recognizing that it would be nearly impossible to recreate the battlefield landscape in its entirety, most stakeholders expressed a keen desire for a stronger connection between existing conditions and the landscape as it appeared during the period of significance. Recommended improvements include removing portions of the auto tour loop to increase the contiguous battlefield area, rehabilitating or reconstructing the rampart and Rodriguez Canal to better reflect their historic dimensions, placing additional historically accurate artillery along the rampart, maintaining vegetation in ways that more accurately reflect historic conditions, acknowledging the historic drainage canals which significantly influenced British battle tactics, and removing trees from battlefield areas of high interpretive value.
Malus-Beauregard House
Stakeholders expressed profound disappointment over existing conditions at the Malus-Beauregard House. Recommendations for improving the structure ranged over a variety of potential alternative uses such as placing period reproduction furnishings in each room and use as a small visitor center, administrative office, multi-purpose interpretive space, and/or storage space. Rehabilitating the landscape immediately surrounding the structure to the period of architectural significance was generally supported by stakeholders. Readers interested in a more detailed assessment and discussion of existing conditions at the Malus-Beauregard House are encouraged to read the Chalmette Battlefield Task Force Final Report and NPS Action Plan.
Historic Character of National Cemetery
Stakeholders and park staff expressed much concern about the deteriorating condition of the cemetery wall and the tendency of headstones to shift position over time. The park conducted a comprehensive assessment of those and other conditions at the cemetery in 2002. After considerable study and consultation with structural experts and local stakeholders, a strategy to rehabilitate the cemetery walls and standards for when to reset and align headstones was determined and published in 2003. The standards adopted in the assessment will be adopted and incorporated into the GMP Amendment and DCP.
Considerable progress has been made over the past few years to replant trees that have been damaged or destroyed by storms. The type and location of these trees is being guided by recommendations in the 1999 NPS Cultural Landscape Report. The standards and guidelines for rehabilitating vegetation in the national cemetery will be adopted and incorporated into the GMP Amendment and DCP.
Stakeholders interested in viewing the 2003 Cemetery Assessment Report or the 1999 Cultural Landscape Report should contact Jean Lafitte National Historical Park and Preserve (504-589-3882).
Many stakeholders commented on the appearance of parked maintenance vehicles and bulk materials like wood or stone near the cemetery entrance. While acknowledging the need for these items, many persons asked whether a more appropriate location to store them might be identified.
Vehicle Parking and Circulation
Some stakeholders indicated that the large number of vehicles often parked outside the entrance gates at the Battlefield and Cemetery, particularly after 5 p.m., is unsightly and potentially unsafe. While few ideas to resolve the issue were offered, the level of concern seemed significant enough to consider options that might improve the situation. A safety concern was expressed about potential conflicts between people and vehicles on the auto tour loop. While the present number of visitors and vehicles simultaneously using the tour loop makes the situation manageable, an increase in visitation might substantially elevate the risk of accidents. Pull-in automobile parking areas along the tour loop were thought to increase the risk of accidents by forcing drivers to back out into oncoming traffic and pedestrians. Some stakeholders suggested that vehicles and pedestrians should be separated by creating an interpretive trail system for people only.
Battle and Non-battle Related Interpretive Themes
Many stakeholders commented that the regional and national contexts of the Battle of New Orleans were not being effectively interpreted. Most recommendations for interpreting battlefield events at Chalmette within their larger contexts were generally associated with recommendations for additional interpretive venues and specifically associated with recommendations for a larger visitor center. A strong emphasis was placed on the important role local and regional partners could play in achieving this goal.
There was strong interest by some stakeholders to identify appropriate ways of acknowledging the park’s non-battle related cultural resources. Most notably, the Chalmette National Cemetery which was established in 1864 to honor Federal soldiers killed in the Civil War; the Malus-Beauregard House (c. 1835); and the archeological remains of Fazendeville, an African-American community that existed on portions of the site from the 1870s until 1964 were mentioned as worthy of more focused interpretive attention.
Recreational Use
The limited availability of walking and hiking trails in the local community has caused the primary visitor experience for many local residents to assume an increasingly recreational tone. While acknowledging the responsibility of park managers to protect the historic integrity of the site, it is also important to recognize that the park contains a large and scenic land base that is attractive to those who might wish to use park resources for activities not directly related to its historic significance. Park managers must constantly weigh their desire to accommodate these uses against the potential for undesirable intrusions on the historic environment.
Cost and Cost Recovery
The cost of implementing improvements proposed in a GMP/DCP is a very important consideration, especially at a time when federal funds are limited and expectations high to finish some of the proposed work in time for the 200th anniversary celebration of the Battle of New Orleans in 2015. While the goals and aspirations of stakeholders should be set high, everyone must be keenly aware that high-cost proposals are at greater risk of not receiving timely funding under present fiscal circumstances.
All potential NPS projects compete for funding from a limited pool of resources. While demonstrating need and describing anticipated benefits are important considerations in this competitive process, equally important is the amount of funding needed in relationship to what is available. NPS projects that demonstrate a potential for some cost recovery stand a significantly higher chance of being funded than those that do not. Cost recovery is simply a term to describe non-federal funds generated at the park that help offset operating and other expenses associated with a proposed project. Typically such funds are generated by charging entrance or participation fees to visitors or through non-federal donations and grants. It is clear that any alternatives in the Chalmette Battlefield and National Cemetery GMP/DCP that propose expensive improvements must also include some form of cost recovery to be viable and feasible.
British Memorial
Some stakeholders expressed an interest in exploring ways to enhance the British Memorial noting that the existing interpretive wayside is neither attractive nor particularly functional.
Park Entrance at Tour Boat Landing
A great many stakeholders noted that the arrival point for tour boat visitors is presently unattractive but has great potential for redevelopment as an overlook and orientation point. There was also broad dissatisfaction among stakeholders with the concrete stair case leading from the top of the levee to the battlefield and particular concern for the inconvenient and unpaved route that persons with disabilities must travel as an alternate to using the stairs.
Sewage Treatment Plant
There was universal consensus among stakeholders that removing the sewage treatment plant would greatly benefit the site. We are extremely grateful and pleased to acknowledge the recent progress made by St. Bernard Parish to facilitate its removal.
Where are we now in the planning
process?
There are typically four steps in planning:
- “scoping” or information
gathering;
- alternative development and analysis;
- preparation and publication
of a draft plan/environmental impact statement;
- and revision of the draft
and publication of a final plan/environmental impact statement.
The planning team spent much of 2003 and 2004 gathering information about the site and conferring with a wide range of planning partners and other interested persons. The planning team convened at the park several times in 2004 to analyze the variety of ideas and recommendations gathered during scoping. As you can imagine, some of these ideas were mutually compatible and some were not. Shortly after the Chalmette Battlefield Task Force submitted its final report, the NPS met to synthesize this information into a few central concepts that expressed the broadest range of stakeholder recommendations while remaining faithful to the central mission of the park and core values of the NPS.
We are now ready to share our preliminary concepts with you and ask for your comments and recommendations to improve them.
Your continued participation is critical to the success of this planning effort. We encourage you to attend one of the public meetings on May 5th to share your thoughts and concerns about the preliminary concepts directly with the NPS planning team.
The planning team is scheduled to meet again formally in June 2005 to review all the comments received about the preliminary concepts. At that time, each concept will be reevaluated and adjustments made as necessary to reflect your input. PMZs will be developed and placed upon the map to guide future managers. We plan to share the revised alternatives with the public in late July or early August 2005 to make sure we are on the right track.
Using any additional input and guidance we receive the May 2005 meetings, a draft GMP\DCP and Environmental Impact Statement will be prepared and presented to the public for a 60-day official public comment period. The target for public release of the draft plan is Fall or Winter 2006.
The planning team will meet again in December 2005 to reconsider the alternatives based on any new substantial input and, if necessary, make final adjustments to the alternatives.
A Final GMP\DCP and Environmental Impact Statement will then be prepared. The target for public release of the final plan is Spring 2006.
The planning
project timetable below highlights these steps, anticipated completion
dates, and additional opportunities for public involvement.
| Step |
Date |
Public Involvement |
| 1. Gather Information |
Winter to Spring 2004 |
Newsletter, response form,
public open house meetings |
| 2. Develop and evaluate alternatives |
Spring 2004 to
Winter 2005 |
Newsletter, response form,
public review, public meetings |
| 3. Prepare and publish draft plan and EIS |
Fall 2005 to Winter 2006 |
Public distribution of draft plan, response form, public
review, public meetings |
| 4. Revise and publish final plan and EIS |
Spring 2006 |
Newsletter, public distribution
of final plan |
How will the plan be conducted?
The Chalmette Battlefield and National Cemetery GMP/DCP will be conducted
by a team of NPS park managers and technical experts. Public participation
will play a central role in the decision making process. The planning
team will consult with other knowledgeable persons inside and outside
the NPS, the Chalmette Battlefield Task Force, and any other interested
groups or persons from the general public before developing its final
recommendations.
As part of the study, the NPS will analyze existing conditions and future
possibilities at the park. A full range of potential management and design
alternatives will be developed and their impacts rigorously explored.
In making decisions, the NPS will seek, to the extent possible, to reach
agreement among the park staff, the NPS leadership, other agencies with
jurisdiction by law or expertise, and the public on the most appropriate
path forward.
As might be expected, some of the things that different people will want
to happen at the park will be mutually compatible and others will not.
The most appropriate mix of these wants will be determined by the NPS
planning team based on the best information available and a systematic
analysis of resource values and land uses.
What is the Chalmette Battlefield Task Force?
The Chalmette Battlefield Task Force is a Federal Advisory Commission
created by the Secretary of the Interior to provide the NPS with recommendations
about potential improvements to the park.
The Task Force is composed of representatives from State and local governments
and citizens of St. Bernard Parish. The NPS planning team has been working
closely with the Task Force to identify important management and development
issues that should be addressed in the plan.
Twelve persons actively served on the Task Force:
- Ms. Elizabeth McDougall, Committee Chairperson
- Capt. Bonnie Pepper Cook, Committee Vice Chairperson
- Mr. Eric Cager
- Mrs. George W. Davis
- Mr. Anthony A. Fernandez, Jr.
- Mr. Alvin W. Guillot
- Mr. Drew Heaphy
- Ms. Faith Moran
- Mr. Paul V. Perez
- Col. John F. Pugh, Jr
- Ms. Geraldine Smith
- Mr. Michael Varnado
The Task Force met about 12 times during 2003 and 2004. Most members of the Task force
live and work in Chalmette or St. Bernard Parish. The Task Force completed its work in August, 2004 and prepared a final report documenting its recommendations for improvement at the park. A copy of the Task Force's Final Report is available on the Newsletters page of this website
Will the plan include an Environmental
Impact Statement?
An environmental impact statement (EIS) will be prepared to help everyone
better understand the advantages and disadvantages associated with each
alternative course of action and serve as the basis for selecting a preferred
alternative.
Will the public and other government
agencies be consulted during the planning process?
Public involvement in the planning process is encouraged in order to
learn about the concerns, issues, expectations, and values of existing
and potential visitors, park neighbors, people with traditional cultural
ties to lands within the park, concessionaires, cooperating associations,
other partners, scientists and scholars, and other government agencies.
Through public involvement the National Park Service will share information
about the planning process, issues, and proposed management actions; learn
about the values placed by other people and groups on the same resources
and visitor experiences; and build support among local publics, visitors,
Congress, and others for implementing the plan.
Park planning is conducted as part of cooperative local and regional
planning whenever possible. NPS participation in cooperative local and
regional planning is undertaken in the hope of better coordinating and
focusing the independent and autonomous efforts of multiple parties. NPS
participation in such planning efforts will not be intended to prevent
reasonable uses of private lands and will acknowledge the rights and interests
of other landowners.
Will the plan consider potential
impacts resulting from its recommendations on areas outside the park?
While being consistent with NPS management policies and park goals,
plans will identify and consider potential effects outside as well as
inside the park boundaries and will identify ways to enhance beneficial
effects and mitigate adverse effects to the maximum extent possible
How can I be involved in the decision
making process?
Public involvement is critical to the success of the Chalmette GMP/DCP
and there are many ways to be a part of the decision making process. Check
the Public Involvement page of this web site
for several ways to be involved with the project.
|
