Historic Preservation Review Sample Clauses

Historic Preservation Review. If the facility that is being renovated with state funds is fifty
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Historic Preservation Review. If the facility that is being renovated with state funds is fifty (50) years old or older, then in accordance with Section 267.061(2)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes, the Grantee must submit information about the grant project to the Division of Historical Resources, Bureau of Historic Preservation ("Bureau"), so that it may determine whether the project has historic significance. Should the Bureau deem the facility to have historic significance, grant funds may only be released after the Bureau notifies the Division, in writing, that the Grantee has satisfied the Bureau's requirements. If the facility is not deemed to be of historic significance, grant funds will be released to Grantee in accordance with Section 5 of this Agreement.
Historic Preservation Review. The City’s Office of Historic Preservation is charged with reviewing the design plans for all structure constructed or installed on City property. The design plans for all Network Huts and fencing surrounding such structures will be subject to the review of the Office of Historic Preservation in order to satisfy that the design is compatible with the historic designation of the zone or character of the neighborhood in which City Sites are located. The Tenant commits to implement design concepts, and the use of materials and camouflage, as necessary in order to achieve compliance with historic preservation review, including following the City of San Antonio Historic Design Guidelines. B Xxxxxxx Aquifer Recharge Zone. Tenant will be required to comply with all environmental protection measures associated with installations and construction of Network Huts at any City Sites located over the Xxxxxxx Aquifer Recharge Zone.
Historic Preservation Review. The Grantee shall not commence construction nor allow commencement of construction until all Project plans have been approved by the Vermont Division for Historic Preservation. Grantee shall construct the Project in accordance with the approved project plans. Any conditions to avoid adverse impact on any historic or archeological resources shall be met, as set forth by letter to Grantee from the Division for Historic Preservation on behalf of the Vermont Advisory Council for Historic Preservation. Any changes to the Project plans must be approved in advance by the Division of Historic Preservation.
Historic Preservation Review. For each project being funded in whole or in part through a Grant Agreement, a historic preservation review must first be completed by the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) or MEA’s historic preservation expert. This review ensures that no historic property is “adversely affected” through building improvements, equipment installations, and related property modifications proposed for Projects funded wholly or in-part by a Program. Prior to starting construction, the Grantee shall ensure that MEA has received documentation from MHT or MEA’s historic preservation expert indicating that the Project will have no adverse effect on a historic property.
Historic Preservation Review. The Grantee must submit the confirmation received from the Bureau of Historic Preservation regarding the historical significance of the property. Applies if structures are 50 years or older. (See Section 22) f) Submit a copy of the Grantee’s Florida Substitute Form W-9. (See Section 7)
Historic Preservation Review. For each project being funded in whole or in part through this Agreement, a historical preservation review must first be completed by the Maryland Historical Trust (MHT) or MEA’s historical preservation expert. This review ensures that no historical property is “adversely affected” through this Program. Prior to starting construction, Grantee must have documentation from MHT or MEA’s historical preservation expert indicating that the Project will have no adverse effect on a historical property. This documentation must be submitted to MEA as promptly as possible, and prior to the beginning of any construction, in order for MEA to approve the Project for construction, using the Project Review Form, attached hereto as Attachment D.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Historic Preservation Review

  • Compliance Review During the Term, Developer agrees to permit the GLO, HUD, and/or a designated representative of the GLO or HUD to access the Property for the purpose of performing Compliance-Monitoring Procedures. In accordance with GLO Compliance-Monitoring Procedures, the GLO or HUD will periodically monitor and audit Developer’s compliance with the requirements of this Agreement, the CDBG-DR Regulations, the CDBG Multifamily Rental Housing Guidelines, and any and all other Governmental Requirements during the Term. In conducting any compliance reviews, the GLO or HUD will rely primarily on information obtained from Developer’s records and reports, on-site monitoring, and audit reports. The GLO or HUD may also consider other relevant information gained from other sources, including litigation and citizen complaints. 5.04 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS: INDEMNIFICATION

  • STATEWIDE CONTRACT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM If the maximum amount payable to Contractor under this Contract is $100,000 or greater, either on the Effective Date or at any time thereafter, this section shall apply. Contractor agrees to be governed by and comply with the provisions of §§00-000-000, 00-000-000, 00-000-000, and 00- 000-000, C.R.S. regarding the monitoring of vendor performance and the reporting of contract information in the State’s contract management system (“Contract Management System” or “CMS”). Contractor’s performance shall be subject to evaluation and review in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Contract, Colorado statutes governing CMS, and State Fiscal Rules and State Controller policies.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!