the system, including the 1927 adaptation to the High Bridge, the complete removal of the receiving reservoir in Bryant Park, the paving of walkways atop the aqueduct berm, and current plans to add eight-foot-high fencing to the High Bridge. Standard treatment guidelines have never been developed for the Croton Waterworks, leading to inconsistencies in its care. A charter of recommended holistic treatment should be written specifically for the Croton Waterworks. Challenges Man and Nature Along the aqueduct trail, trees small and large are encroaching on berms. These trees not only block the path aboveground, but their roots can permanently damage the aqueduct itself underground. In the Bronx and Manhattan, sections of the Croton Waterworks are heavily littered with trash, and in some cases, the path is enclosed by barbed wire fences that further encourage littering and mistreatment. Several of the stone ventilators along the path of the Old Croton Aqueduct have spray paint graffiti on them. The paint, barbed wire, and trash should be removed, and fences that currently keep people away from the path of the Waterworks should be moved back to the outside edge of a buffer zone on either side of the path. integrity of the Croton Waterworks compromised. Clearly, cost and manpower are essential components to the maintenance equation. Perhaps more attention on a national and global level will bring with it higher funding for more careful maintenance. Section 3: Preservation project near the Waterworks should trigger a Section 106 review, where reasonable alternatives can and should be considered. Top Left: Trash by the trail in the Bronx Top Right: Lack of interpretation at the New Croton Dam Bottom Left: An inadequately paved stretch of the trailway in Yonkers Bottom Right: Graffiti on a ventilator in Yonkers Deferred Maintenance The deterioration of many elements, both at the hands of man and nature, has left the 38 39 Some designations offer legal protection and some simply acknowledge the Waterworks’ significance, but designations can also help to heighten public awareness and promote education and action. Designations can also affect zoning as well as state and federal constructions near the Waterworks. The Croton Waterworks is well designated; some designations include the whole system, some just its components. Historic Civil Engineering Landmark (American Society of Civil Engineers) 1975: Croton Water Supply System National Register of Historic Places (National Park Service) *By default of the National Register process, the following listings are also designated on the New York State Register of Historic Places: 1972: High Bridge, Aqueduct, and Water Tower, reference number 72001560 1973: Old Croton Dam Site, reference number 73001289 1974: Old Croton Aqueduct, reference number 74001324 1983: 135th Street Gatehouse, reference number 83001721; High Pumping Station (Bronx, NY), reference number 83003882 40 National Historic Landmark (National Park Service) 1974, 1992: Old Croton Aqueduct, OMB number 1024-0018 (This designation includes the submerged portion of the Aqueduct between the Old and New Croton Dams, as well as the Bronx portion of the Aqueduct running from Westchester to the Manhattan end of High Bridge. This was not previously included on the 1974 National Register nomination.) Local Protection New York City Landmarks Law 1965: This law was “enacted in 1965 in order to protect historic landmarks and neighborhoods from precipitate decisions to destroy or fundamentally alter their character. The law also established the creation of a permanent Landmarks Preservation Commission. The Commission is authorized to designate a building to be a ‘landmark’ on a particular ‘landmark site,’ or to designate an area as a ‘historic district.’ The legal definition of a landmark stipulates that the building must be at least thirty years old, and have either historical or architectural merit, as determined by the Commission...The owner of the designated landmark, in this case, New York City and New York State, is legally required to maintain the building’s exterior ‘in good repair,’ and to secure Commission approval before any exterior alterations are made.”1 State Level Protection New York’s State Environmental Quality Review Act (SEQR): National/Federal Protection National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA): All federal agencies must consider the environmental impact, just as with SEQR, on any historic, archaeological, or cultural site. “NEPA requires analysis and a detailed statement of the environmental impact of any proposed federal action that significantly affects the quality of the human environment. The federal government is required to use all practicable means and measures to protect environmental values consistent with other essential considerations of national policy to avoid environmental degradation; preserve historic, cultural, and natural resources; and ‘promote the widest range of beneficial uses of the environment without undesirable and unintentional consequences.’ Therefore, the NEPA makes environmental protection a part of the mandate of every federal agency and department.” If a federal agency or federally funded project comes near a historic district or site, particularly one listed in the NRHP (bingo),