Laserfiche WebLink
VITOUSEK: An updated archaeological inventory surveyoh, hold on one second, let me try <br /> to work it out here. I would say that the commitments made—instead of"an updated"the <br /> commitments made in the Archaeological Inventory Survey approved by the Historic <br /> Preservation Division, or by the State Department Land and Natural Resources - Historic <br /> Preservation Division, shall be adhered to throughout the construction process, or development, <br /> or permit life, or whatever the case may be. <br /> CARR SMITH: Is that clear? Sid, are you okay with that? <br /> FUKE: - - - I'm muting myself. That's fine. <br /> CARR SMITH: Christian? <br /> KAY: Yeah, understood, and we're okay with that. <br /> CARR SMITH: Okay. Do we need any more clarity on O or are we simply replacing "prepared <br /> and submitted"to "shall be compliant?" <br /> KAY: Yeah, I mean, we can, we can look at, we can list the, the subsequent archaeological <br /> plans that took place, that grew out of the AIS, and essentially just make a statement that all of <br /> the, the requirements within these documents shall be complied with for the life of the permit, or <br /> something like that. But this is a Change of Zone, so through the life of the development or <br /> something to that effect. <br /> CARR SMITH: Are you okay with that, Sid? <br /> FUKE: - - - <br /> CARR <br /> - -CARR SMITH: Sid, is that acceptable to the applicant? <br /> FUKE: Yeah, in summary, like, what I understand is like, what Commissioner Vitousek is <br /> saying is totally understandable, because you can have like an approved AIS, or data recovery <br /> plan and if it never gets implemented—if it gets implemented, then that's fine but if it doesn't <br /> get implemented and say you're 20 years down the road, archaeological protocols may change <br /> and all that stuff, so do you want to necessarily be married to something that may no longer be <br /> applicable. And I think what—and correct me, if I'm wrong, Commissioner VitousekI think <br /> what the intent is, is basically to say that, you know, if you don't develop and at that point in <br /> time if there's a need to update it, you know, to address current archaeological protocols, then it <br /> has to be done and you have to adjust your plans accordingly. Is that what you're getting at? <br /> VITOUSEK: No, basically what I'm saying is that if, if the language in the conditioning <br /> applying to the permit is removed, then the County has no teeth to enforce the compliance with <br /> these mitigation plans. So basically, you've got burial treatment plans and preservation plans <br /> that have established buffers around the historic sites in the area. If we have that, you know, <br /> saying that compliance with those buffers is a condition of the County permit, then if the <br /> 11 <br /> EXHIBIT B <br />