Sunday, January 06, 2019
TKC SUNDAY SPECIAL!!! HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACTIVISTS DEMAND NEW KCI AIRPORT COMPLIANCE PLAN!!!
So far both politicos and developers haven't shared many details with the public about plans and the requirements for the new Kansas City single-terminal airport.
From pricing struggles to baggage disagreements, the new airport debate is shrouded in mystery and MSM has mostly served to document spin from lame duck Mayor Sly.
Now . . .
KANSAS CITY HISTORIC PRESERVATION ACTIVISTS DEMAND GREATER TRANSPARENCY IN NEW KCI CONSTRUCTION AND DOCUMENTATION OF THE BUILDING PROCESS THAT HAS BEEN SECRETIVE SO FAR!!!
They've included attachments and important documentation that backs up their argument which serves to further understanding of the project that has offered the public few details.
Watkins Foundation Advocate: Where is KCI's Section 106 compliance plan?
Is massive construction at Kansas City International Airport (KCIA) in compliance with federal historic preservation laws? Including the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act (NAGPRA), Section 106 and others? We don’t know but there is real cause for concern.
KCIA has proposed a 580-page construction contract (attached) with a private company (Edgemoor Real Estate) to build the new airport. In keeping with the enormous scale of this project, the contract is an extremely detailed blueprint for how the new airport will be built. This contract stipulates that Edgemoor will comply with federal laws pertaining to worker safety, hazardous substances, and many others. Yet this contract makes no mention whatsoever of complying with NAGPRA, Section 106 of the NHPA or any other federal historic preservation laws. Nor does this contract mention the Programmatic Agreement (PA) issued by the FAA, mandating the airport to conduct monitoring of construction areas for buried archaeological deposits and/or human remains.
Let’s be clear. The FAA’s PA requires archaeological monitoring of the proposed construction (see Attachment 4 of the PA, attached). This is mandatory. Yet no mention is made of this requirement in the proposed construction contract. This is not a trivial omission. The proposed construction contract is the legal authority that will guide the construction process.
If this contract does not require Edgemoor to comply with the PA, how will such compliance occur? We don’t know. What about planning this extremely complex construction project? If the construction contractor is unaware of a requirement to implement archaeological construction monitoring, how will such implementation occur in the construction process? Again, we don’t know. In such a detailed construction contract, why isn’t something as important as mandatory compliance with NAGPRA and Section 106 left out? We don’t know.
But we should know. The airport is required to comply with historic preservation laws to no less an extent than other federal laws that are included in the construction contract. Is it reasonable to proceed with a construction contract without a clear blueprint for implementing the FAA’s PA for Section 106 compliance? We don’t think so.
Please join us in requiring KCIA to produce a written plan for how it intends to comply with Attachment 4 of the FAA’s PA before construction is permitted to proceed. We are hereby asking the airport to provide us with a copy of this plan, and to provide other stakeholders, particularly including consulting Native American tribal governments, with this plan.
For the Watkins Foundation,
Kansas City, Missouri
Developing . . .