Prototype·Built by Concourse for Arizona State Historic Preservation Office
← Back to project
Arizona State Historic Preservation Office
State Parks Building · 1100 W Washington St · Phoenix, AZ 85007 · shpo@azstateparks.gov
Prototype letterhead — generated by SHOPP
March 19, 2026
USDA — Rural Development
Attn: contact224@example.gov
RE: Section 106 Consultation, Rail line rehabilitation — Maricopa Co. Supplemental
SHPO File: PRJ-2026224 · Maricopa County, AZ
Received: 3/19/2026 · Deadline: 4/18/2026

Dear contact224@example.gov:

The Arizona State Historic Preservation Office (SHPO) has reviewed your rail line rehabilitation submission for the above-referenced undertaking pursuant to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part 800.

Project description. SYNTHETIC demonstration record. Rail line rehabilitation submitted by USDA — Rural Development.

Area of Potential Effects (APE). The APE includes a polygon of approximately 103.41 km² centered at 33.2283°, -111.4144° in Maricopa County, Arizona.

Federal nexus. The APE intersects the following surface management jurisdictions: Private Land (Private); State Trust Land (State).

Flood hazard. The APE intersects FEMA flood zone(s) A, X (Special Flood Hazard Area).

Identified historic properties. The submission identified 1 historic property within or adjacent to the APE:

  • Queen Creek Bridge (NRIS 88001643) — recommended effect: No historic properties affected.

ADOT historic / scenic route(s). Picacho to Cooliddge to Chandler to Mesa to Payson to Winslow; Quartzsite to Wickenburg to Phoenix to Globe to Show Low to Springerville; Quartzsite to Wickenburg to Phoenix to Globe to Show Low to Springerville.

Determination. Based on the foregoing, SHPO concurs with a finding of NO ADVERSE EFFECT pursuant to 36 CFR 800.5. Stipulations to protect contributing resources during construction shall be incorporated into the project design and monitored by a qualified historic preservation specialist.

This determination is non-final until concurrence is received from all consulting parties. Should the scope of the undertaking change, please resubmit for re-review per 36 CFR 800.13.

Sincerely,

D. Ramirez
reviewer · Arizona SHPO
This letter was auto-drafted by SHOPP using the unified GIS layer set and the project’s submitted polygon. Final review and signature by the assigned reviewer is required before issuance.