2010-08-12 THU HONUA - Laserfiche WebLink

Home

are inconsistencies and there ardsghmfrvqnmfgdqd+xntlqdfnhmfto need to do more work. Then the Planning Department rdmcrhmrnldsghmfb`kkdc`nEhm`kKhsdq`stqdQduhdvo`mc sgdqdlr`bnudqkdssdqeqnlGtGnmt`lrrs`shmfhshrsgdEhm`k@qchaeological Review. And they th send it to the State Historical Preservation Division on the 11 of March. They received it on th the 15. By their rules they have 45 days to decidehehslr`cdpt`sdnqhehslrmnsbnlokdsd- Within that 45-day period they wrote to the Planning Department amcrs`sdchsv`rmlsfnnc enough. And, in fact, now PCSI has gone back to the property and has discovered historic properties; and some of us have been writing in and pointing ntssg`ssgdnkc078/lrlhkkhrrshkk there, and all these other structures are still sgdqd`mcsgdxlqdmnvrtqudxhmfsgdoqnodqsx`mc they have not completed Item@nexntqQtkd8,00'a(+nS he applicant shall submit the following to the Director:… (5) Archaeological Resources (one of the following):… An archaeological inventory report containing significance assessments.” Significance assessments, they’re not there yet. They just found the property. They haven’t quite surveyed them, they haven’t made that decision. They have to write a report that determines whether these are now significant or not, and what the effect of this project is on them. And the proposed mitigation commitments, all of that had to be done before the application was complete. They tried to get a “no effect” letter, they didn’t get it. They were told they didn’t have enough information about the property. They tried to somehow trick them with Item C with this 30-day thing, but that didn’t work because they responded and said it wasn’t good enough. Your rule states something that is in parallel with the State Historic Preservation Administrative Rules on page 11 of -. Their Administrative Rules are under the DLNR and it’s 13-284. On page 11 of that Administrative Rule it says that they have 45 days. In the beginning of that rule it states that the agency has the responsibility of determining if there are or not historic properties. They’re supposed to confer with the State Historic Preservation Division. They’re going to, I guess the State Historic Preservation Division is going to have a meeting with the Planning Department because they don’t understand the rules. They’re supposed to pick up the phone, they’re supposed to write a letter and say in the very beginning of getting an application, and write a letter saying we’re going to be reviewing this, you know, let’s get together and decide if there are historic properties or not, let’s agree whether there are or not, whether we have the facts, what’s required to determine if there are or aren’t. You don’t know. Hu Honua may have already destroyed historic properties in this cleanup campaign that they had. Somewhere between 1993 and 2002 or 2009 most of the historic properties were destroyed, but luckily some of them are there. WOODWARD: Okay, Ms. Rohr -. ROHR: Okay. That’s my timing thing. WOODWARD: That’s it. ROHR: So now you can ask me questions. WOODWARD: Okay. So you have read a copy of the objections from Hu Honua? 9 EXHIBITC