Laserfiche WebLink
VITOUSEK: Prior to making a motion, would it be possible to call the applicant up one more <br /> time? <br /> UNGER: Yes, certainly. Would the applicant please come forward? <br /> VITOUSEK: So, my question is whether you would be willing to withdraw, and then complete <br /> the archaeological field inspection, and then come back to us for consideration of, so we can <br /> consider the effects on historic properties? <br /> KERN: We would not be willing to withdraw. We'd be willing to continue. <br /> VITOUSEK: Sure, yeah. I'm not, I'm not sure on the language. If that works where you guys <br /> are able to come back another time. <br /> KERN: Yeah, I mean, correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Campbell, but we are not, we are not overly <br /> attached to it one way or another. We are kind of, path with the least resistance, we are happy to <br /> make that work. <br /> VITOUSEK: So, if we could postpone, let's say, a month to give you guys time to go out there <br /> and conduct the archaeological field inspection, and then come back next time with the results of <br /> that, is that something that you'd be willing to do? <br /> KERN: We'll do that. So we'll postpone to the following Planning Commission meeting, yeah? <br /> VITOUSEK: Can I make a motion that we postpone this agenda item until the following <br /> meeting? <br /> UNGER: Yeah, you can. <br /> KERN: And <br /> UNGER: Oh, go ahead. <br /> KERN: just adding, can we then work on changing the language to that condition as well? <br /> VITOUSEK: Yes, yeah, I think that the condition will be amended as a result of the field <br /> inspection <br /> KERN: Perfect. <br /> VITOUSEK: so, we'll, we'll be saying that, if the field inspection comes back saying that <br /> there is no historic properties, we'll eliminate it; if it realizes we need to have an archaeological <br /> inventory survey, we'll reflect that. <br /> KERN: Perfect. <br /> 8 <br /> EXHIBIT A <br />