2007-01-19 twaikoloadevco - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

wouldn’t have a problem with granting the extension. But if there has been a change in the water quality, there has been a change in the reef conditions, and then we have to, you know, we don’t want to take action that would compound that matter. So I think that, if anything, that we have to seriously consider the conditions upon which the extension will be granted, so that further degradation wouldn’t take place. And you know we need to -. Science has change, right? I mean the science from ten, fifteen years ago is not the science that we have today. So we need to consider all of those factors, I think. And as these extensions they are designed there. This is Special Management Area, you know, it’s our law to protect the environment so we need to, and it’s our responsibility to enforce that law. And I believe continuance of this matter to allow time to get the information that we requested is an appropriate action. GRAHAM: Thank you. ALAMEDA: Mr. Chair? GRAHAM: Yes? ALAMEDA: Thank you. This is a real short comment. I think for the applicant, you know, that’s the risk you take. The discussion that we have now is kind of the risk you take by not complying with the timelines, previous timelines. So I think it’s a fair question that the Commissioners has asked of the applicant, and I too would be in favor of continuing this. Thank you, Mr. Chair. GRAHAM: Thank you. I might say that what I was looking for as far as new material would be, not that you reproduce everything that has been written about what’s going on in the ocean and in this area since 1977 with the original permit, but that maybe you give us a bibliography telling us exactly what studies have been done, so that the Planning Department or anyone here could find it, and that you just give us the specific detail studies that you feel are most relevant to what we are dealing with today, which to me would include the conditions back when this permit was originally granted and current conditions. And then if you choose to summarize on that, that’s certainly up to you, too. But that’s what I was thinking. Thank you. Commissioner Alameda? ALAMEDA: Thank you, Mr. Chair. I’m ready to entertain a motion. Do we need to call the applicant back up? GRAHAM: I don’t think so at this time. Yes, Mr. Torigoe? TORIGOE: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I was just going to suggest also that I think it’s a good idea to address your concerns regarding getting information about whether there have been some changes that have occurred, and what the existing information tells us about the current impacts and the likely impacts of the new course. And I also suggest that it would probably be helpful if the applicants could look at the proposed conditions, you know, apparently they weren’t really familiar with the proposed conditions or the reasons why they are there. But it may be that those conditions will help mitigate whatever impacts are shown by the existing information, or if there are other conditions that they could also suggest that would help to mitigate any apparent impacts. That’s basically your responsibility, is, you know, to take a look EXHIBIT C 12