|
prepared to do is to kind of like straighten out that area and provide a more organized parking,
<br />you know, for the public who would then utilize that, well, who are using that area. But by
<br />making additional improvements, it would enhance and provide additional parking for the public
<br />who would want to use the coastal area, particularly the White Sands, Magic Sands Beach as
<br />well as Pahoehoe Park.
<br />And lastly, I think that, you know, relative to what the Director is proposing as an additional
<br />condition, I think the Director’s proposed Condition No. 3 -. And probably, you know, the
<br />genesis behind that is that, you know, there are going to be a number of, you know, should this
<br />permit be approved with the conditions as recommended by the Planning Director, there are
<br />going to be some site changes, site plan changes that may need to be done, you know, to
<br />accommodate possibly a mauka-makai connection to the Alii Parkway, straighten out the
<br />entryway for the public parking area, accommodation for the Archaeological Preservation Plan.
<br />And so what this does is that, and this may result in some measure of reduction in the density
<br />such that, you know, rather than having a proposed structure maybe adjacent to the major
<br />archaeological features, you know, there may have to be like a Single-Family dwelling to
<br />accommodate that interest. And so the other condition I think what the Director’s proposing is
<br />something that we would be supportive of. Because, if anything, it establishes, you know -.
<br />What you see right now is a cap, but what this does is that provides for some accommodations to
<br />lower the density without having to go back to the Planning Commission for further review.
<br />With that, Mr. Chairman, I think that pretty much sums it up from our standpoint.
<br />ALAMEDA:Okay, thank you. Commissioner Siracusa and then Commissioner
<br />Watanabe.
<br />SIRACUSA:Sidney, I’m looking at Page 4 of the Background Report, Item No. 21,
<br />Cultural Resources. And it says, the last sentence there at the bottom of the page, “If legitimate
<br />claims for gathering are made, the project will be designed and managed to accommodate such
<br />claims.” And I’m wondering, No. 1, have any such claims been made thus far to date and, No. 2,
<br />has the Applicant gone out of his way to do any outreach to find out if there are any such or
<br />would be any such claims were people to know about the development?
<br />FUKE:Sure. That’s a very pertinent question. In conjunction with the draft
<br />Burial Treatment Plan, it is the obligation on the part of the archaeologist, the preparer of that
<br />plan, to do outreach and consult with family members, or others who may have historical
<br />association with that area. And so through that dialogue, which would have to be captured in the
<br />Burial Treatment Plan, if there are such claims, then accommodations would have to be made.
<br />Definitely, accommodations to get access to the burial would have to be provided. Relative to
<br />native plants in that area, according to the botanist, the only thing that they found was the, but
<br />it’s not an endangered plant, was the ko`oko`olau, and others were all invasive species. So, but
<br />if there are claims, then they will have to provide accommodation.
<br />SIRACUSA:So just for clarification, you’re saying that thus far no claims have been
<br />made? Is that accurate?
<br />DICKLER:That’s correct. No claims have been made. And, in fact, the archaeologist
<br />and members of our firm have made outreach to the known descendants on this property.
<br />EXHIBIT B
<br />7
<br />
<br />
|