history of urban development in that area. After the discovery of the first intact burials became publicly known, the African-American community became very concerned. With the pressure of construction costs, GSA tried to continue excavation and construction on the site. The community believed it was not being sufficiently consulted and that respect was not being given to the nature of the discoveries. They believed that the burial findings required a better archaeological project design for protection and study of the remains. Protests Initially, GSA had planned full archaeological retrieval of the remains as full mitigation of the effects of its construction project on the burial ground. Within the year, its teams removed the remains of 419 persons from the site, but it had become clear that the extent of the burial ground was too large to be fully excavated. In 1992, activists staged a protest at the site about GSA's handling of the burial issue, especially when it was found that some intact burials were broken up during construction excavation at part of the site. GSA halted construction until the site could be thoroughly assessed. It provided additional funding to conduct a further archaeological excavation to reveal any other bodies on the site and to assess the remains. Located between New York City Hall and the federal courts, the site had symbolic value. The "invisibility" of Black history in New York City partially accounts for the importance of the Foley Square site"; activists hoped to find a means there to redress "the injustice and the imbalance of the historic record, and to give voice to the silenced ones". Although archaeologists studied the site and the remains for almost a dozen years, critics of the construction project believed GSA's original archaeological research design was inadequate, as it did not require a plan for the treatment of uncovered remains. In addition, the African-descendant community in New York City was not consulted in the development of the research design, nor were any archaeologists who had experience studying the African diaspora, although GSA had distributed the EIS to more than 200 state and local agencies and stakeholders, many recommended by the city. In the early stages of the project, national GSA officials and related Congressional committees directed that excavation and construction proceed. Oversight of the project increased by stakeholders, such as the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation and community activists. After continued protests from