Section 106 Review Instrumental In Saving Leavenworth Buildings
By Caitlin Jones & A. J. Johnson
3 min read
Tax Credit Advisor August, 2006: Preservationists seeking to prevent the demolition of the 38 historic structures located at the Dwight D. Eisenhower Veterans Affairs Medical Center in Leavenworth Kansas say that a review process established by Congress was the key to saving the properties.
Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) of 1966 requires that each federal agency consider the effects on historic properties of any project it is planning to undertake. That agency – together with the state historic preservation office (SHPO) and any recipients of federal funds located in the area, such as a city – must then determine if the project area includes historic properties, and if they will be harmed by the project. If a determination is reached that the project would “adversely affect” a historic property, alternatives must be considered.
The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) administers the NHPA’s Section 106 review process. ACHP is an independent Federal agency that promotes the preservation and the enhancement of historic resources, and advises the President and Congress on national historic preservation policy.
A Successful Case Against Demolition
In the case of the Eisenhower Medical Center, the Kansas State Historic Preservation Office and a coalition of preservation groups successfully argued that that the demolition and cemetery expansion would not only impact the buildings that had housed disabled Civil War veterans, but also the site of an early 19th century Baptist mission and ancient Indian burial grounds.
The preservation groups pushing to retain the historic buildings included the Kansas Preservation Alliance, and the Preservation Alliance of Leavenworth, and the Veterans Administration of Leavenworth Opportunities for Reuse, and the National Trust for Historic Preservation. In 2000, the National Trust helped the preservation effort by including the property on its list of the nation’s Eleven Most Endangered Historic Places.
In a compromise plan worked out with the VA that spared the buildings, it was agreed that nine acres of land from the historic district on which the buildings are located would be used for expansion of the veterans’ cemetery. In addition, it was agreed that other adjacent land not part of the historic district could also be used for this purpose.
“This is an excellent outcome for historic preservation that balances the local community’s desire to retain important heritage resources while putting them to productive use, and allows a needed expansion of a cemetery for veterans,” said John M. Fowler, ACHP’s executive director.
