1301GervaisStreet,Suite1600 Columbia,SouthCarolina29201 tel: 8037584500

March 13, 2012

Design Review Board Town of Hilton Head Island One Town Center Hilton Head Island, SC 29928 RE: Hilton Head Island Airport Landscape Plans for Mitigation of Tree Removal Runway 21 Approach CDM Smith Project Number 86216

Gentlemen: Submitted herewith is the DRB submittal application for the referenced project, with supporting documentation, for review at the March 27, 2012, Design Review Board meeting. We seek approval of this submittal so this project can be advertised for construction at the earliest opportunity. Thank you in advance for your consideration of this matter. Sincerely,

Charles F. Stearns, PE Project Manager Enclosures Cc: Mr. Paul Andres, Airport Manager

Town of Hilton Head Island

Community Development Department
One Town Center Court Hilton Head Island, SC 29928 Phone: 843-341-4757 Fax: 843-842-8908 www.hiltonheadislandsc.gov

FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Date Received: _____________ Accepted by: ______________ App. #: DR_______________ Meeting Date:

_____________

Applicant/Agent Name: _Paul Andres____________________ Company: Beaufort County_______________________ Mailing Address: __120 Beach City Rd.________________ City: Hilton Head Island State: SC______ Zip: 29926__ Telephone: (843) 255-2950_________ Fax: (843) 255-9424__ E-mail: pandres@bcgov.net_______________________ Project Name: On-Airport Tree Mitigation Runway 21 Approach Project Address: Hilton Head Island Airport________ Parcel Number [PIN]: N/A_ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ Zoning District: IL_____________________________ Overlay District(s): AZ Airport Overlay District__________

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD (DR) SUBMITTAL REQUIREMENTS

Digital Submissions may be accepted via e-mail by calling 843-341-4757. Project Category: _____ New Development Conceptual _____ New Development Final, indicate Project Number Submittal Requirements for All projects: _N/A_ Private Architectural Review Board (ARB) Notice of Action (if applicable): When a project is within the jurisdiction of an ARB, the applicant shall submit such ARBs written notice of action per LMO Section 163-1004. Submitting an application to the ARB to meet this requirement is the responsibility of the applicant. _N/A Filing Fee, New Development $175, Alterations/Additions $100, Minor External $50 cash or check made

__X_ _ Alteration/Addition __ _ Minor External Change

payable to the Town of Hilton Head Island.

Additional Submittal Requirements: New Development Conceptual Approval _____ A survey (1"=30' minimum scale) of property lines, existing topography and the location of trees meeting the tree protection regulations of Sec. 16-3-405, and if applicable, location of bordering streets, marshes and beaches. _____ A site analysis study to include specimen trees, access, significant topography, wetlands, buffers, setbacks, views, orientation and other site features that may influence design. _____ A draft written narrative describing the design intent of the project, its goals and objectives and how it reflects the site analysis results. _____ Context photographs of neighboring uses and architectural styles. _____ Conceptual site plan (to scale) showing proposed location of new structures, parking areas and landscaping. _____ Conceptual sketches of primary exterior elevations showing architectural character of the proposed development, materials, colors, shadow lines and landscaping.

Last Revised 5/20/10

NARRATIVE TO ACCOMPANY DESIGN REVIEW BOARD SUBMITTAL Landscape Plans for Mitigation of On-Airport Tree Obstruction Removal Hilton Head Island Airport Runway 21 Approach

Background Tree obstructions have been removed from the airport property for the Runway 21, 34:1 approach in accordance with the permit issued by the Town of Hilton Head Island in 2011. The work began in September 2011 and was completed in February 2012. Project Description The landscape plans submitted with this application were prepared according to requirements and guidelines provided in the Towns Land Management Ordinance (LMO) and in consultation with Town staff. They represent the proposed mitigation for trees removed from the airport property, by replacement planting. All mitigation is proposed to be done within the buffers defined within the LMO, on airport property. Permits No wetlands permits are required since all planting is to occur outside the wetlands and wetland buffers. The non-buffer area will be grassed, utilizing non-tilling methodology, i.e., sprigging. A land disturbance permit will therefore not be required. The area bounded by the western buffer line, the eastern 34:1 line and a line parallel and 110 feet from the end of the existing airport fence will be grassed to accommodate the proposed extension of the runway safety area. The remainder of the non-buffer area will be planted with either native grasses or Bermuda depending upon the resolution of the FAA and Town differences concerning same. Please refer to the attached copies of letters from the FAA to Mr. Gary Kubic dated March 1, 2012, and from Mr. Gary Kubic to Hon. Drew Laughlin and Mr. Steve Riley dated March 9, 2012. This project is currently being coordinated with the State Historic Preservation Office because it lies within the historic Mitchelville site. See attached copy of the letter transmitting the project information to SHPO, dated March 12, 2012.


1301GervaisStreet,Suite1600 Columbia,SouthCarolina29201 tel: 8037584500

March12,2012 Mr.JohnSylvest ReviewandCompliance,SCSHPO 8301ParklaneRoad Columbia,SC29223 Subject:Section106ProjectReviewFormfortheTreeObstructionRemovalProjectfor Runway21PhaseIattheHiltonHeadIslandAirport,BeaufortCounty,SC DearMr.Sylvest: PleasefindattachedarevisedSection106ProjectReviewFormandsupportingdocumentation toupdateyourofficeconcerningthisprojectandresumeconsultationinordertofulfillSection 106oftheNationalHistoricPreservationActforactionsproposedbytheFederalAviation Administration(FAA).InordertocomplywiththeTownofHiltonHeadIslandLand ManagementOrdinance(LMO)concerningtreeremoval,theFAAmustplantbacktrees previouslyremovedthatcomplywiththeLMOaswellasFAAregulationsregarding obstructionswithinairspace.BeaufortCounty,theowneroftheHiltonHeadIslandAirport, contractedwithCDMSmithtoprovideatreemitigationplanthatconformstothese regulations.InordertofulfillSection106consultationpreviouslybegunforthisproject,thetree mitigationplanissubmittedforyourreviewandrecommendation. ProjectHistory Section106consultationforthisprojectwasbegunin2008withthesubmittalofaProject ReviewFormandreportentitledHistoricResourcesAssessmentfortheTreeObstruction RemovalProjectforRunway21attheHiltonHeadIslandAirport,BeaufortCounty,SC(Bean, 2008).Theprojectatthetimeconsistedoftreetrimmingandtreeremovalwithinthe graduatingairspacecontoursoftheapproachslope(tothefrontoftherunway)andthe transitionslope(tothesidesoftherunway)forRunway21.Thehistoricresourcessurvey identifiedtwohistoricresourcesandtwoarchaeologicalsites.FishHaulArchaeological Site/Mitchelville(38BU805)islistedontheNationalRegisterofHistoricPlaces(NRHP)and FortHowell(38BU79/1151),whichwasconsideredeligiblefortheNRHPatthetimeandisnow listedontheNRHP.Site5042istheCherryHillSchoolhouse,consideredeligiblefortheNRHP, andSite5043,theSt.JamesBaptistChurch,considerednoteligiblefortheNRHPbutmaybea TraditionalCulturalProperty.YourofficeconcurredinaletterfromFranKnightdatedJuly31, 2008andalsoofferedguidanceonprocedurestofollowfortreetrimmingandremovalwithin

 Mr.JohnSylvest March12,2012 Page2

historicareas.TheletterdefinedhistoricareasasthepropertiesofFortHowellandMitchelville withanextensionoftheNRHPboundariesofMitchelvilletoincludethehistoricalextent, whichforthisprojectasitextendswestofDillonRoadandsouthofBeachCityRoad.(See attachedc.1865mapofMitchelville)BecauseTownofHiltonHeadrequirementsforplanting backtreeswerestillbeingnegotiatedthentheletterexpressedtheopinionthatplantinginthe historicareaswouldbeconsideredanadverseeffectandconsultationwithyourofficeregarding thismattershouldcontinue. InanemaildatedAugust10,2009,PaulAndresfromBeaufortCountycontinuedconsultation withyourofficebyaskingifreplantingwithinthebufferareasalongBeachCityRoadin fulfillmentofTownrequirementswouldbeacceptableornot.RebekahDobraskorespondedin anemailonAugust17,2009withtherecommendationthataqualifiedarchaeologistbepresent duringreplantinginthehistoricareastoassesspotentialartifactsanddetermineiffurther consultationorinvestigationiswarranted. TheTownofHiltonHeadrevisedtheirLMOin2011toincludeanAirportOverlayDistrictwith correspondingregulationspertainingtotreeremovalandplantback.TheLMOrequiresthe Airporttodocumentalltreesremovedandsubmitamitigationplandetailingwhattreetypes andsizeswillbeplantedback.Treetypesarelimitedtonativespeciesandreplacementtree sizesaredeterminedbycategoryoftreeremoved.Forinstance,CategoryIandIItreesare broadleavedevergreenordeciduousoverstoryhardwoods,broadleavedevergreenunderstory, andendangeredspecies.Theymustbereplacedwithtreetypesofthesamecategorythatare10 feettallandatleasttwoinchesindiameter.Forairportproperty,treeplantbackisrequired withindesignatedbuffers.Adjacentusebuffers(alongDillonandBeachCityroads)and wetlandbuffersontheairportpropertywereestablishedat75feetinwidth.Additionalbuffers includetheareasbetweenthewetlandbufferandtheroadwaybuffersandtheareasbetween thewetlandbufferandthe1:34approachslopeline.(Buffersareshownontheattachedtree mitigationplan.) CurrentPhaseofProject BeaufortCounty,whichisreceivingfundingfortheprojectfromFAA,electedtosplitthe projectintoseveralphasesinordertocomplywithFAAairspaceobstructionregulationsfor Runway21.PhaseI,thephasewithwhichthisProjectReviewFormisconcerned,involvestree trimming,treeremoval,andplantback.Thetreetrimmingandremovalwasconducted betweenOctober2011andFebruary2012inaccordancewiththebestpracticesoutlinedinthe July31,2008letterfromyouroffice.ThenexttaskistofulfilltheTownofHiltonHeadsLMO requirementswithplantingbacktreesthatwereremoved.WithLMOplantbackregulations andFAAheightrestrictionsinmind,atreemitigationplanwaspreparedandsubmittedfor

 Mr.JohnSylvest March12,2012 Page3

Townapproval.HavingreceivedapprovaltheplanswillnowbesubmittedtotheTownOf HiltonHeadIslandDesignReviewBoardinordertoreceivetheappropriatepermits. FuturephasesoftheTreeObstructionRemovalProjectwillincludetreetrimming,tree removal,andplantbackintheapproachslopethatisoffairportpropertyandalsointhe transitionslopebothonandoffairportproperty.Consultationwithyourofficeforthesephases willoccurattheappropriatetime. Section106Recommendation TheAreaofPotentialEffect(APE)forPhaseIofthisprojectistheproposedtreemitigationsite onairportpropertywhichistherequiredbufferareas.Plantingbacktreeswithintherequired bufferareasonairportpropertywillentailapproximately1,200treesplantedatanaverage depthofoneandonehalffeetandanaveragewidthofthreefeet.Depthandwidthsdependon thesizeoftreebeingreplanted.AlthoughexistingNRHPboundariesfortheMitchelvillesitedo notincludeairportproperty,itwasdeterminedintheJuly31,2008letterfromyourofficethat thehistoricalextentofthesiteshouldbeconsideredeligiblefortheNRHP.Thehistorical extentincludesairportpropertyandspecificallyincludesthebufferzonestobereplanted. Replantingwouldconstituteagrounddisturbingactivityandtherefore,isanadverseeffectto historicproperty. HiltonHeadIslandAirporthasanadditionalproject,thatofextendingRunway21,thatis currentlybeingstudiedinthefield.BrockingtonandAssociatesiscompletingtestingwithinan APEthatisadjacentormayevenoverlapthisprojectsAPE.Areportonthearchaeological findingsoftherunwayextensionprojectshouldbeforthcomingtoyourofficeviaBeaufort Countysconsultant,TalbertandBright. OtherAlternatives TheLMOincludesaTreeReplacementFundthatmaybeusedasmitigationforwhentrees cannotbereplacedonaproperty.ItincludesanallowancefortheAirporttousethisfundonly ifadequatebuffersarealsoestablished.Therequiredstreetbufferandwetlandbufferareasare withintheMitchelvillesite.Therefore,plantingbacktreeswithinthehistoricpropertywould stillberequirediftheTownsTreeReplacementFundwasusedinordertoreducethenumber oftreesrequiredforplantback. Plantingtreeselsewhereonairportpropertyisnotfeasiblebecauseareasonthepropertythat wouldsupporttreegrowthinconformitytoapproachandtransitionslopeheightrestrictions arealreadydenselyplantedandwouldnotbeabletosustainthenecessaryvolumerequired. Conclusion

 Mr.JohnSylvest March12,2012 Page4

PleaseadviseiftherecommendationfromyourofficeintheemaildatedAugust17,2009tohave aqualifiedarchaeologistpresentduringreplantingisstillvalidinlightoftheupdatedproject informationandtheforthcomingarchaeologicalsurvey.Ifitisnot,thenpleaseadviseonways toreduce,avoid,ormitigatetheadverseeffectofthetreemitigationplan. Iappreciateyourreviewandcommentsonthisproject.Iamavailabletoansweryourquestions at8037584756orbyemailatBeanjl@cdmsmith.com. Verytrulyyours, OriginalSigned JanaBean ArchitecturalHistorian CDMSmithInc. cc: LisaFavors,FAA PaulAndres,BeaufortCounty

South Carolina Department of Archives & History State Historic Preservation Office
SECTION 106 PROJECT REVIEW FORM
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act requires the South Carolina State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) to review all projects that are federally funded, licensed, or assisted. The SHPO is only one consulting party under Section 106. Refer to 36 CFR 800.2 for information about other participants who are entitled to comment on the Section 106 process, including Native American tribes, interested parties, and the public. Consultation with the SHPO is NOT a substitution for consultation with appropriate Native American tribes.

HELPFUL TIPS: x Please consult the FAQs located at the back of this document. If you cannot find the answer, then contact the Review and Compliance Coordinator at (803) 896-6169. x If you need more space to answer the questions, please attach additional pages. x When planning to submit a project for review, please remember that our office has 30 days to review federal projects and 45 days to review due diligence projects. Due to the volume of phone calls and e-mails we receive, we are unable answer inquiries regarding a projects status until 30 days has elapsed. x Please DO NOT send project review forms by e-mail or fax; we recommend that you use certified mail, Fed-Ex, or UPS so that you can determine if your project has been delivered. Due to the volume of phone calls and e-mails we receive, we are unable to confirm if your project has been received. x Please send this completed form along with supporting documentation (photographs, maps, plans, etc.) to: Review & Compliance Coordinator, SC Department of Archives & History, 8301 Parklane Road, Columbia, SC 29223. You must include all of the supporting documentation in your package. If we do not receive the requested documentation, we are unable to review your project until these materials are received. STATUS OF PROJECT (check one) FEDERAL UNDERTAKING ANTICIPATED (You are applying for Federal assistance) FEDERAL UNDERTAKING ESTABLISHED (You have received Federal assistance) DUE DILIGENCE PROJECT (You are anticipating Federal assistance) ADDITIONAL INFORMATION FOR PREVIOUS SUBMISSION (SHPO #:__________) GENERAL INFORMATION 1. Project Name: Tree Obstruction Removal Project for Runway 21 at Hilton Head Island Airport-Phase I _______________________________________________________________ Beaufort Hilton Head 2. City: ________________________ 3. County_______________________
FAA 4. Federal Agency (providing funding, license, permit, or assistance): _____________________ Lisa Favors, Environmental Planner Agency Contact Name:________________________ 1701 Columbia Ave., Campus Bldg., Suite 2-260 College Park, GA 30337 Address: _______________________________________________________________ 404-305-7145 Lisa.Favors@faa.gov Phone: __________________________ E-mail: _________________________ Beaufort County 5. Federal Agency Authorized Applicant: ___________________________________________ Paul Andres, Airports Director Applicant Contact Name: ______________________ Address: 120 Beach City Road Hilton Head Island, SC 29925 _______________________________________________________________ 843-252-2995 pandres@bcgov.net Phone: __________________________ E-mail: _________________________ CDM Smith 6. Consultant for the Applicant or Agency: __________________________________________ Jana Bean Consultant Contact Name: ______________________ Address: 1301 Gervais St, 16th Floor _______________________________________________________________ 803-758-4756 Beanjl@cdmsmith.com Phone: __________________________ E-mail: _________________________

10/14/2010

INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR NEW PROJECTS NOTE: If the project involves the rehabilitation of a building eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places, complete and submit the Historic Building Supplement in addition to this form. DETERMINING THE PROJECT AREA OF POTENTIAL EFFECT (APE) 1. Describe in detail all aspects of the project. Include a detailed description of any proposed ground disturbance and any proposed building rehabilitation or repairs.
Planting of trees on airport property within the approach slope at the northeast end of Runway 21 which is closest to the intersection of Beach City Road and Dillon Road. Planting will require 1200 trees planted at an average depth of 1 1/2 feet with a rootball requiring on average 3 feet in width.

2. Will this project involve phases of construction? If so, please describe the work to be conducted under each phase:
Phase I concerns planting trees on airport property within approach slope. Phase II will concern trimming, removal and planting trees off of airport property within the approach slope. Future phases may involve the transitional slope both on and off airport property. This review form is only for Phase I.

3. How many acres are in the project area? For building rehabilitation projects, list the buildings square footage.
4.3 acres

4. Describe the current land use within and immediately adjacent to the project area (e.g. farmland, forest, developed, etc.):
Current land use within airport property involves an airport runway, clear cut space, and buffer zone. Adjacent is a church, park, private property, and roadways.

5. Describe prior land use or previous modification within and immediately adjacent to the project area (e.g. grading, plowing, mining, draining, etc.):
Within airport property has been significant grading for runway construction. Adjacent modifications are minimal with the exception of paving roads.

6. Will the project involve (check all that apply): new construction rehabilitation of any structures relocation of any structures demolition of any structures 7. Provide a written description of the Area of Potential Effect (APE). The APE is the geographic area or areas within which a project/undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, if such properties exist.
The APE for Phase I is the tree mitigation site within the approach zone of Runway 21 on airport property. (See attached)

IDENTIFICATION OF HISTORIC PROPERTIES

A historic property can be defined as any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion on the National Register.

1. ATTACH a copy of the pertinent ArchSite GIS map to this submission. Please see http:// archsite.cas.sc.edu/archsite for information on registering for and using the GIS database. 2. ATTACH a copy of a map and clearly mark the project site. If your project involves ground disturbance, a USGS topographic map is required. You can obtain a topographic map at http://www.mytopo.com or http://www.maptech.com. 3. ATTACH original photographs of the project area. Be sure to include any structures on site. 4. ATTACH a site plan or sketch of the project area (existing and proposed). 5. List all historical societies, local governments, members of the public, Indian tribes, and any other sources consulted in addition to the SHPO to identify known and potential historic properties and note any comments received.
Members of the public were consulted for original Historic Resources Assessment (Bean, 2008).

6. Are there any structures in the project area (houses, barns, old garages, sheds, commercial buildings, churches, etc.)? YES NO _____ Approximate age? 7. Does the landowner know of any archaeological resources? If yes, please describe: YES NO

Previous archaeological surveys in adjacent areas have found artifacts relating to Mitchelville and Fort Howell.

8. Has a cultural resources assessment or a historic resources survey been conducted in the area? YES NO DO NOT KNOW 9. Based on the information contained in questions 1 8, please check one: Historic Properties are present in the APE Historic Properties are not present in the APE ASSESSMENT OF PROJECT EFFECT
PLEASE CHOOSE ONE DETERMINATION:

No historic properties affected No adverse effect on historic properties Adverse effect on historic properties Due Diligence Project (Does not apply) Please explain the basis for your determination:
The undertaking will require ground disturbance within the historic boundaries of Mitchelville.

SECTION 106 FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS (FAQs)

1. What is Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA)?
Section 106 of NHPA requires each Federal agency to identify and assess the effects of its actions on historic properties. The responsible Federal agency must consult with appropriate State and local officials, Indian tribes, applicants for Federal assistance, and members of the public and consider their views and concerns about historic preservation issues when making final project decisions. The regulations that implement Section 106 are 36 CFR 800, and can be found at: http://www.achp.gov/regs-rev04.pdf.

2. What is the Area of Potential Effect (APE)?

As defined in 36 CFR 800.16(d), the APE is the geographic area or areas within which a project/undertaking may directly or indirectly cause changes in the character or use of historic properties, if such properties exist. The APE is influenced by the scale and nature of the project/undertaking and may be different for different kinds of projects (undertakings). Every project/undertaking has an APE, which must be defined.

3. What are historic properties?

Historic properties are those properties that are eligible for or listed in the National Register of Historic Places. In order to be eligible, a property must be at least 50 years old and meet one of the following criteria: associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of history; associated with the lives of significant persons in our past; embodies distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or that have yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

4. Where can I find information on historic properties?

Please visit ArchSite at http://archsite.cas.sc.edu/archsite. Thanks to a grant from the South Carolina Department of Transportation, the State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) was able to partner with the South Carolina Institute of Archaeology and Anthropology (SCIAA) to develop ArchSite. This online service is a GIS based map that contains all of the known historic properties in the State of South Carolina. Please note: even if ArchSite does not list any historic properties in your APE, that does not mean that there are not any historic properties present. Be particularly sure to notify us of any existing structures on the site, regardless of age. You should consult hard copy records at SHPO, SCIAA, or your local historical society.

5. What is an Adverse Effect?

Under Section 106, a project adversely affects a historic property if it alters the characteristics that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property. "Integrity" is the ability of a property to convey its significance, based on its location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. Adverse effects can be direct or indirect. They include reasonably foreseeable impacts that may occur later in time, be farther removed in distance, or be cumulative. Examples of adverse effects include:

x x x x x x

physical destruction or damage; alteration inconsistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; relocation of the property; change in the character of the property's use or setting; introduction of incompatible visual, atmospheric, or audible elements; neglect and deterioration.

6. What happens if construction is already under way when I receive federal funding or permits?
Under Section 110(k) of the National Historic Preservation Act, federal agencies are permitted to withhold grants, licenses, approvals, or other assistance to applicants who intentionally significantly and adversely affect historic properties. This provision, known as the "anticipatory demolition" section, is designed to prevent applicants from destroying historic properties prior to seeking federal assistance in an effort to avoid the Section 106 review process. If you have begun work, please stop and notify the Federal agency.

7. Should I consult with the Tribal Historic Preservation Officer (THPO)?

Yes. Consulting with the SHPO is not the same as consulting with the Tribes. You must consult with the Tribes as a part of the Section 106 process. For more information, please visit: http://www.achp.gov/regs-tribes.html.

8. Where can I find more information?

Please visit our website for more FAQs and information on the Section 106 process: http://shpo.sc.gov/revcomp