COM 0666.018 2006-2008 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

Planners Page 6 Apri121, 2003 mitigation commitments and (5) agreeing to the detailed mitigation plan. There will eventually be some verification that the mitigation plan has been implemented. Generally, SHPD does not actually have the power to make private landowners preserve non-burial historic sites. Preservation can be imposed by the county (or LUC) as a condition of zoning, based upon SHPD review and comment. As a matter of normal practice, the Planning Department will make compliance with the interim and final preservation plans approved by SHPD be a condition of approval for administrative permits and approvals, when there has been a historic sites review, and we will recommend compliance with the same as a standard condition for land use permits and approvals where the Department makes a recommendation to the Planning Commission or the Council. The County and LUC can also require preservation of sites that SHPD does not. We will ordinarily not do this but it may turn out in the course of the land use approval process that a particular site has more cultural significance than realized by SHPD (for example, if there is public testimony about its significance). The assessment of significance is not a science. When reviewing azchaeological reports, you will notice classifications by "type", such as "wall", "platform", "mound", and "terrace". You will also note classification by "function", such as "permanent habitation", "shrine", "boundary marker", and "agricultural feature." While archaeologists will sometimes differ on the "type" classification, it is relatively straightforward compazed to the "functional" classification, which is open to a great deal of interpretation, and will often color the significance assessment. For example, a site maybe significant under criterion "e" if the archaeologist thinks it is a shrine. We will generally defer to SHPD in determining the adequacy of an inventory survey, whether an inventory survey is needed, significance assessments, and other aspects of the historical review process that are more the province of specialists in archaeology and historic sites than planning, per se. Applications The purpose of this portion of the memo is to set out common expectations and requirements for the treatment of historic sites at each stage of our common types of land use approvals and applications. It is important to give a common understanding to applicants about what we expect. Also, because we have time frames as well, we need to