Kaplan Kirsch’s historic preservation law team guides clients through the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), Section 4(f), and related laws. We represent airports, transit agencies, local governments, and conservation organizations in Section 106 reviews, agency negotiations, and federal litigation. Our work serves both sides of a resource conflict. Sponsors of energy, transportation, and infrastructure projects turn to us to avoid and resolve disputes that would otherwise delay or derail critical work. We also help protect irreplaceable historic and cultural resources, including sacred sites and National Historic Landmarks. In every matter, we help clients identify both obligations and opportunities. Then we develop strategic, context-sensitive solutions to even the most challenging resource conflicts.
The Federal Laws That Protect Historic Places
Three federal provisions shape much of our work.
What Does Section 106 Require?
Section 106 of the NHPA requires federal agencies to consider how their projects affect historic properties. It applies to any project that needs federal funding, permits, or approvals. Agencies must consult with State Historic Preservation Officers, tribes, and other consulting parties. They must also give the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation a chance to comment. We help clients plan for consultation early and negotiate agreements that resolve adverse effects.
How is Section 4(f) Different from Section 106?
Section 106 is procedural. Section 4(f) of the Department of Transportation Act is substantive. It bars U.S. DOT agencies from using historic sites or public parks when a feasible and prudent alternative exists. Section 6(f) of the Land and Water Conservation Fund Act separately protects parks acquired or developed with its grants. Our team prepares Section 4(f) and 6(f) documentation and defends it in court.
What Does Section 110(f) Protect?
Section 110(f) protects National Historic Landmarks. It applies when a federal project could directly and adversely affect a landmark. Before approving that project, the agency must plan to minimize harm to the maximum extent possible. Kaplan Kirsch litigated the first successful claim under this provision.
How We Help
Our work across issues, project types, and stakeholders informs advice at every stage, from early planning through federal court.
- Section 106 strategy and consultation with State and Tribal Historic Preservation Officers
- Programmatic agreements and memoranda of understanding
- Section 4(f) and 6(f) documentation for transportation projects
- National Register of Historic Places nominations
- Structuring real estate transactions and federal activities to avoid preservation complications
- Litigation under the NHPA and Section 4(f), and National Monument boundary disputes