2023-04-20 DRAFT Joint Meeting Exh B (Proposed Amendments to PC Ruls 8 & 9)

Home

KNOWLES: Yes. Sorry, I don't have the language in front of me. But I move that we — DEFRANCO: Affirmative or make. KNOWLES: — affirm and enter the discussion. I move to accept the proposed changes that the Planning Department has presented to us today for Rules 8, 9. DEFRANCO: Thank you. We have a second. PAISHON-DUARTE: Second. DEFRANCO: Commissioner Paishon-Duarte. Okay, so, now we have a motion on the floor. So, now we are open to discuss and look at this and pull it apart and ask questions amongst each other and talk about how this is going to affect everybody. So,please raise your hands if you want to make your comment. I know Mike, I cut off there. Do you want to start off? VITOUSEK: Sure. DEFRANCO: Okay. VITOUSEK: Sure, okay. Going back to the 9-13. So, under HAR 13-284 it is the County's responsibility to identify any historic properties that are present in the project area and to conduct the historic preservation review processes six (6) steps, right, identification, evaluation, mitigation, confirmation mitigation. In order to do that I think the County would need to receive more information up front as part of the application. My recommendation would be that the application include some sort of assessment prepared by a qualified archaeologist that identifies the potential for historic properties and provides a determination of a fact that the agency can then agree with or not agree with and submit that to SHPD for concurrence. I think that the information that's there currently in the language is adequate. It does put responsibility on the applicant but SHPD's rules 13-284 allows for the agency to delegate responsibilities of the process to an applicant. So, there can be a formal delegation from the agency to the applicant to conduct the historic preservation review process items which would allow the applicant to then prepare an AIS in advance of the application and get all that stuff figured out before it comes to Commission. DEFRANCO: And that would shorten the process. VITOUSEK: I think so because I think as it currently is as is proposed, I'm sorry, as is being proposed all the information that we would have is a plot map and information on any known historic sites and cultural properties. Which as we've all known is insufficient in determining whether there are actually historic and cultural properties on the, in the area. So, that application comes in with that limited information that has to go to SHPD and would be relying on them to turn that around within 30 days and I don't know how that works with our 11 EXHIBIT B (DRAFT)