Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Historic Preservation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Section 106 review clears seismic retrofit at Mike Mansfield Federal Building in Butte
Summary
GSA presented a seismic retrofit and limited modernization for the Mike Mansfield Federal Building; the Historic Preservation Commission found the project consistent with No Adverse Effect to the National Historic Landmark District and approved the Section 106 finding unanimously.
The Historic Preservation Commission voted unanimously May 5 that the proposed seismic retrofit and limited modernization of the Mike Mansfield Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse is consistent with No Adverse Effect to the National Historic Landmark District.
The General Services Administration presented the project as largely structural, focused on bringing the building up to seismic standards while restoring interior common spaces and repairing exterior masonry. "The project is mostly structural to meet seismic standards, and most of the work will be behind the scenes," said Steve Janzen, a GSA representative who spoke at the meeting. Janzen also said the project includes an unobtrusive ADA-accessible ramp, repair of spalling granite, repointing mortar joints, terracotta restoration, removal of incompatible sealants, and replacement of non-original window sashes with painted wood sashes.
Kate McCourt, the Butte-Silver Bow Historic Preservation Officer, framed the work as a large undertaking that balances safety upgrades with restoration of historic fabric. After the presentation, Chairman Steve Hinick moved that the Section 106 review be found consistent with No Adverse Effect to the NHLD; Commissioner Russell O'Leary seconded the motion and the commission voted to approve it unanimously.
Why it matters: the finding allows the project to proceed through federal review with preservation mitigation in mind while addressing seismic safety for a significant federal building in Butte. The decision also reduces the likelihood of formal adverse-effect mitigation requirements that would delay project timelines.
Next steps: GSA and the HPO will proceed with the agreed scope and any follow-up documentation required by Section 106 procedures. The commission did not specify additional mitigation measures at the meeting and no vote tallies beyond "unanimous" were recorded in the transcript.
