Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0226.000 2002-2004Harry Kim Mayor COUNTY OF HAWAII 25 Aupuni Street, Roam 215 . Hilo. I Iawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 961-8211 • Fax (808) 961-6553 KONA'. '5.5706 Kuakini Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 (808) 329-5226 • Fax(808)326-5663 April 24, 2003 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-003) Request: Agricultural (A-20) to Agricultural (A -10a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) Applicant: James B. Dusel Tax Map Key? 7-4-003: 007 Dixie Kaetsu Managing Director As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action is the Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above -referenced request. Si rely, Harry Kim Mayor Enclosures cc: Planning Department 13.11 it -� Gomm No. 22f. Ref. To: Ref. Dote Harry Kim Malar County of Hawaii PLANNING COMMISSION 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 (808)961-8288 • Fax (808)961-8742 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-003) Request: Agricultural (A-20) to Agricultural (A -10a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) Applicant: James B. Dusel Tax Map Key: 7-4-003: 007 The Planning Commission, after a duly held public hearing on April 4, 2003, voted to recommend for your approval the proposed legislative bill to change the district classification for approximately 21.725 acres of land from Agricultural (A -20a) to Agricultural (A -10a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a). The property is located in Kealakehe Homesteads, First Series, approximately 700 feet east of Mannalahoa Highway bordering the Upper Government Road and two homestead roads, and approximately 500 feet south of the Makua Lam Christian Science School and one mile southeast from the Mamalahoa Highway-Palani Road junction, Kealakehe, North Kona, Hawaii. The Commission concurs with the following Planning Director's reasons for recommending favorable consideration of the change of zone: The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A -20a) to an Agricultural (A-1Oa)and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) zoned district for 21.725 -acres of land to allow for its subdivision into two lots consisting of approximately 3 acres and 18.726 acres. The applicant intends to purchase a 3+ acre portion of the 21.725 -acre project site with the intention of constructing his home and developing a fruit orchard and coffee farm. The balance of the project site (18.726 acres) will be retained by the present owners who intend to utilize a portion for cattle grazing. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 2 In order to consider an area for any type of zoning designation, the applicable goals, policies and standards of the General Plan must be adequately addressed. It is only through such a comprehensive policy analysis approach that evaluations and decisions can be made to better time and stage developments to achieve the growth desired as stated in the General Plan and other related planning documents. The implications of these evaluations and decisions must be also considered as they may have an impact on similar areas in the County. The Change of Zone request from Agricultural (A -20a) to an Agricultural (A -10a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) zoned district will conform to the following goals, policies and standards of the General Plan Land Use Elements. Land use is one of the principal focal points of public concern and policy. The Land Use Element provides the primary basis for direct control and guidance of publicly and privately owned resources. It is also intended to be used as a policy guide for the coordinated growth and development of all sectors of the County. It sets forth goals, policies, standards and courses of action to accommodate growth without congestion, to designate and preserve the lands needed for residential use, commercial and visitor services, industry, agriculture and open space, and to coordinate these uses with the County's service and circulation systems. The overall Land Use and Agriculture goals, policies and standards are set forth to physically plan the lands in the County in the best interest of the island's residents. These state the following: LAND USE and AGRICULTURE • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County. • Zoning request shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, compatibility with adjacent zone uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need. • Zone urban- and rural- types of uses in areas with ease of access to community services and employment centers and with adequate public utilities and facilities. • Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community, region and County. • Rural -style residential -agricultural developments, such as new small-scale rural communities or extensions of existing rural communities, shall be encouraged in appropriate locations. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment. The proposed change of zone request would also complement the following goals, policies and standards of the Housing Element of the General Plan: �L•IiI.�L► e; • Attain safe, sanitary, and livable housing for the residents of the County of Hawaii. • Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County. • Maintain a housing supply which allows a variety of choice. • Develop better places to live in Hawaii County by creating viable communities with decent housing and suitable living environments for our people. • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock. • Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee -simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. • Ensure that housing is available to all persons regardless of age, sex, marital status, ethnic background, and income. • The County shall encourage a volume of construction and rehabilitation of housing sufficient to meet growth needs and correct existing deficiencies. • The County shall protect residential property values from depreciating influences. The Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map component of the General Plan is a representation of the document's goals and policies to guide the coordinated growth and development of the County. It graphically depicts the physical relationship among the various land uses as anticipated for the island. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non -urban form for areas within the County. The subject area is presently designated Orchards. It should be noted that the County is currently conducting Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 a comprehensive review update to the General Plan, which proposes that lands designated as Orchards be redesigned as Important Agricultural Lands, Rural or Extensive Agricultural. The project site is proposed for reclassification as Important Agricultural Lands. However, in light of the fact that the subject property is still designated Orchards by the General Plan, the proposal is reviewed under the present LUPAG Map designation. The Planning Commission supported this change to the LUPAG Map, which has been forwarded to the County Council for final adoption. Further, the subject area is adjacent to and east of existing lands that currently maintain an Agricultural -1 acre (A -la) zoning with parcels as small as 1/2 -acre. In 1997, the County Council approved a request by Robert F. Greenwell, L.P. to rezone approximately 85.4 acres of land located about 1,000 feet northeast of the project site from an A -20a to an A -10a zoned district to allow for its subdivision into 5 parcels ranging from 10 to 36 acres in size. In 2001, Robert K. Greenwel I submitted a request to rezone approximately 26.198 acres of land located about 1,000 feet north of the project site and just makai of the 1997 change of zone site from an A -20a to an FA -la zoned district to allow for the subdivision of his property into 23 one -acre sized lots. The Planning Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation of Mr. Greenwell's change of zone request to the County Council. Mr. Greenwell has since withdrawn his change of zone request from further consideration. A favorable recommendation of this change of zone request will promote a land use pattern that is consistent with the character of existing land uses in the immediate vicinity and the General Plan's LUPAG Map classification of Orchards. Lands to north and west (makai) support one -acre agricultural lots. The applicant's request will allow the creation of one 3 -acre sized parcel with the remaining 18.726 acres to be retained with a zoning of A -10a. This change of zone request, with its limited scope, will continue to allow for the cultivation of the land for orchard uses, as committed by the applicant through the growing of coffee and fruit trees. The Kona Regional Plan, adopted in 1984, does recommend the retention of the project site's existing A -20a zoning. However, the project site is situated adjacent to lands that maintain a much smaller agricultural lot size of one acre. Given the limited scope of the applicant's request to create one 3 -acre sized parcel while retaining the remainder of the project site as an 18.7 -acre parcel, the overall effect will not compromise the basic intent of the Kona Regional Plan to maintain the larger agricultural lot sizes in support of Orchard uses. Therefore, a favorable recommendation of this change of zone request will also be consistent with the land use pattern being established within this area of North Kona. Should the County Council approve the applicant's request for a Family Agricultural (FA -3a) zoned district, the applicant would normally be allowed to apply for an Additional Farm Dwelling, which would allow the constriction of a second dwelling unit as a separate or attached unit on each of the lots to be created. Due to the fact that this subject request will allow the existing parcel to be subdivided and subsequently allow the applicant to create an additional lot, there is a potential for an additional dwelling to Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 5 be constructed on each lot which would double the existing density of the area. Although, the Planning Director supports this rezoning request to allow a two -lot subdivision with one parcel maintaining a minimum lot size of 3 acres, to allow for the construction of an additional home on each of the proposed lots may contribute to a cumulative burden on the existing infrastructure (road, water, etc.), that cannot be supported. Therefore, a condition is included to require restrictive covenants in the deeds of the proposed lots to prohibit a second dwelling unit on each lot. The project site has been previously cleared and utilized for the cultivation of ornamental plants such as dracena, avocado, ti, coffee, and various palms. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates the project site as being situated within Zone X, an area determined to be outside of the 500 -year flood plain. The project site is classified as Other Important Agricultural Lands by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawai `i (ALISH) System. Soils within the property and surrounding area are classified as "C" or "Fair" for agricultural productivity by the Land Study Bureau. A favorable recommendation of this change of zone request will not compromise the potential of the project site to support intensive and/or extensive agricultural uses. A smaller parcel size may provide for increased opportunities for small-scale agricultural activities to be conducted on the lands as proposed by the applicant. The restriction on the construction of additional farm dwellings on each created lot will also preserve these lands for potential agricultural use and limit its conversion into home sites. All utilities and services are available to the site. Access to the project area is provided by the Mamalahoa Highway, which is a State highway that is, for this particular portion, under County jurisdiction. From the Mamalahoa Highway, access to the project site is provided by a 20 -foot wide Homestead Road that maintains a pavement width of 10 feet in fair condition. The Subdivision Code requires that subdivisions consisting of lot 3 acres or larger in size requires roadways with pavement widths of at least 20 feet within a minimum 50 -foot wide right-of-way. Given the limited scope of the applicant's request and recommended limitation of no more than one farm dwelling on each of the proposed two lots, improvement of all of the Homestead Roads fronting the project site to standards specified by the Subdivision Code will be unreasonable and notjustified by the anticipated impacts associated with this rezoning request. However, in anticipation of potential future subdivision and development within the project site and surrounding area, this favorable recommendation will require the applicant to designate a minimum 15 -foot wide road -widening casement along all its properly boundaries to accommodate the future widening of these Homestead Roads to a 50 -foot wide roadway. For similar reasons, we feel it is unreasonable to have this applicant improve sight distance at the Mamalahoa Highway -Homestead Road intersection located at least 700 feet from the Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 6 project site. The proposed rezoning will allow for the construction of one additional homesite from that currently permitted by its existing A -20a zoning. Aside from designating a 15 -foot wide road widening easement, no additional improvements to area roadways are being recommended as part of this favorable recommendation. In this particular instance, the Planning Director considers it reasonable to support the requested change of zone and to allow the proposed 2 -lot subdivision of the project site that will utilize the existing 20 -foot wide Homestead Road for access. Should this change of zone request be approved, the applicants will be required to secure a variance from the minimum roadway standards of the Subdivision Code, a variance request that the Planning Director will support in this particular instance. Water to support the proposed two -lot subdivision can be made available from the Department of Water Supply. At issue is how such water service will ultimately be provided to the two proposed lots. According to the applicant, two water meters have already been purchased from the Department of Water Supply, with each service intending to service each of the two proposed lots. Both an "elevation agreement" and an "out-of-bounds agreement" were executed by the applicant with the Department of Water Supply allowing these two meters to service the subject property and the two proposed dwellings. While two water meters are currently available to support two dwellings on the entire 21.7 -acre project site, the act of subdivision of the project site into two parcel will require the upgrading of the water system to meet standards set forth by the Department of Water Supply, even if two water meters are already available to support the proposed lots. These improvements include the installation of a 6 -inch water main, 100,000 gallon reservoir with booster pumps, and new service laterals. This favorable recommendation will limit the number of homes to be constructed on the 21.7 -acre project site to two (2) dwellings. The final analysis is that water is available to support each of the two dwellings being considered within the project site. If the applicant decides not to subdivide and just build two homes on the subject property, then the existing two service laterals can be utilized with no additional improvements or upgrades to be required by the Department of Water Supply. However, the act of subdividing the lot will trigger the need to provide these system upgrades as recommended by the Department of Public Works, even if the end product will be to support only two dwellings. A favorable recommendation of the change of zone request without additional water system improvements would not be contrary to a policy of the General Plan to "Zone urban- anti rural- tf ypes q uses in areas ti tth ease of access to community services and employment centers and with adequate public utilities and /i cilities." As mentioned, two existing water service laterals and meters are already available to support each of the two dwellings being proposed within the 21.7 -acre project site. Should a variance from the minimum requirements of the Subdivision Code be necessary to allow the applicant to subdivide the project site utilizing its existing two water service laterals and meters, the Planning Director would be supportive of such a request given the applicant's specific Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 7 and unique circumstances that appears, for all intent and purposes, a matter of technicalities rather than the availability of water services. The Department of Health stated that the project site lies within 1,000 feet of a drinking water well (Honokohau Production Well and Reservoir Site) on TMK: 7-4-5: 6. As such, no cesspool or septic tank system is allowed within the 1,000 feet radius limits. Therefore, all wastewater systems shall meet conformance with the rules and regulations of the State Department of Health governing wastewater systems. Therefore, restrictive covenants for the proposed lots shall be drafted to assure compliance with this requirement and submitted to the Planning Department for review prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval. We don't anticipate that this will be a problem for the proposed subdivision since it involves a single lot being created within a much larger 21.7 -acre parcel. Opportunities existing to relocate the proposed 3 -acre parcel to meet the minimum requirements of the Department of Health. All other essential utilities and services are or will be made available to support the proposed development.. The subject development is not contrary to Chapter 205A, 1 Iawai`i Revised States, relating to Coast Zone Management Area. The property is located a little over three (3) miles from the ocean. The proposed development will not adversely impact recreational resources, including access to and along the shoreline or to mountain areas, scenic and open space vistas, visual resources to the shoreline, coastal ecosystems and marine ecosystems. Finally, because the property and surrounding areas have been previously used for fanning activities, it is not anticipated that endangered or threatened candidate species of flora or fauna are located within the subject property, nor has the arca been identified as a significant botanical or biological habitat. An archaeological inventory survey of the project site was conducted in June 2000 by Rechtman Consulting. This survey identified a total of six (6) archaeological sites within the project site consisting of two (2) agricultural complexes and four (4) walls. All of these features were deemed important for their informational content and that preservation of these features were riot required. No further work on these features were recommended. Approval of this inventory survey with recommended mitigation measures by the Department of Land and Natural Resources will be required prior to conducting any land alteration activities. Further, the applicant is not aware of any valued cultural, historical or native resources nor any traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights being practiced in the area, it is not anticipated that the proposed request will have any adverse impact on cultural or historical resources in the arca. The limited scope of uses and improvements associated Ni ith this change of zone request to an Agricultrual-10 acre (A -I Oa) and Family Agricultural -3 acre (FA -3a) district Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 8 provides for smaller -scale agricultural lots while maintaining the rural and agricultural atmosphere prevalent within this portion of North Kona. In addition, including a condition to limit the construction of any second dwellings would minimize further increase in density on the proposed lots and its associated impacts upon existing public infrastructure. The project site will still remain within the State Land Use Agricultural District, which would be consistent with the uses on surrounding agricultural lands. Based on the above findings, approval of the Change of Zone request from Agricultural (A -20a) to an Agricultural (A-l0a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the public. For your favorable consideration, an amendment to Section 25-8-3 (North Kona Zone Map), of the County Zoning Code is transmitted. We are enclosing a copy of the staff background for your information. Sincerely, i Fred Galdones, Chairman Planning Commission Lduse102PC Enclosures cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke Mr. James Dusel Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Planning Department - Kona Department of Land & Natural Resources Rodney Haraga, Director/DOT-Highways, Honolulu n Duse IRFZdsa-03/28/03 COUNTY OF RAWAI'I PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT JAMES B. DUSEL CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-003) James B. Dusel has submitted an application for a Change of Zone by changing the district classification from Agricultural (A -20a) to Agricultural (A -10a) and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) for approximately 21.725 acres of land. The property is located in Kealakehe Homesteads, First Series, approximately 700 feet east of Mamalahoa Highway bordering the Upper Government Road and two homestead roads, and approximately 500 feet south of the Makua Lani Christian Science School and one mile southeast from the Mamalahoa Highway- Palani Road junction, Kealakehe, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-4-3: 7. GENERAL INFORMATION I . Land Ownership: The subject property, consisting of 21.725 acres, is owned in fee by John Matucha and Stefanie Delmont. The applicant, James Dusel, is a potential purchaser of a portion of the project site, should this change of zone request be approved. Mr. Matucha and Ms. Delmont have authorized the applicant to file this change of zone application. BACKGROUND INFORMATION 2. November 27, 1985 — Final Subdivision Approval (Subdivision No. 5327) issued to allow the subdivision of Kona Kali Farms Subdivision. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT 3. Request: The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A -20a) to an Agricultural (A-1Oa)and Family Agricultural (FA -3a) zoned district for 21.725 -acres of land to allow for its subdivision into two lots consisting of approximately 3 acres and 18.726 acres. 4. Objectives: The following information, in part, was provided by the applicant: "The applicant intends to purchase a 3+ acre portion of the subject parcel with the intention of constructing his home and improving the undeveloped site into a fruit. orchard and coffee farm. Me balance of the site will be retained by the present owners, who intend to utilize a portion of the site for cattle grazing. A minimum 3 -acre area would be cultivated into a fruit orchard and coffee. Although an additional farm dwelling could technically be applied for, the applicant believes that a conventional 2 -lot subdivision would be more appropriate. This would make financing of the proposed dwelling and any loans associated with the fruit and coffee orchard less cumbersome as well as provide some measure of conveyance flexibility in the future. The applicant further believes that while the coffee industry is supported by large-scale, commercial farms, the smaller, family-owned farms make a significant contribution to the industry. There are quite a number of families in this area raising coffee on less than 5 acres of land, mostly for supplemental income." 5. Supportive Information: The applicants have submitted the following in support of the request: See Exhibit A - Change of Zone Application) STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 6. SLUC: Agricultural 7. HRS Chapter 205A, Coastal Zone Management Act: The intent of the Coastal 'Zone Management Program is to guide and regulate public and private uses in the coastal zone management area with respect to recreational resources, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. Although the entire island is within the Coastal Zone Management Area, the subject property is located on the mauka side of Mamalahoa Highway, a little over three (3) miles from the nearest coastline. 8. Hawaii State Plan Consistency: Objectives and policies for the Population, Economy — in general, Facility Systems — Solid and Liquid Wastes, Transportation and Energy, and Socio -Cultural Advancement — Housing. 9. General Plan Consistency: Housing and Land Use (Agricultural) goals, policies and courses of action for North Kona. 10. General Plan band Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: Orchards. Lands designated Orchards include those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papaya, citrus and other similar agricultural products. It should be noted that the County is currently conducting a comprehensive review update to the General Plan, whereby lands designated as Orchards, unless otherwise designated, will be converted to Important Agricultural Lands. This recommended amendment, among others, are currently pending review and action before the Hawaii County Council. 11. Kona Regional Plan: The Kona Regional Plan adopted by the Planning Commission in April 1984, recommends that the project site maintains its current Agricultural designation and its minimum 20 -acre lot sizes. 12. County Zoning: The 21.726 -acre project site is currently zoned Agricultural -20 acres (A -20a). 13. Special Management Area: The project site is not situated within the Special Management Area (SMA). DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 14. Project Site and Property: The subject property consists of approximately 21.726 acres of land located along the slopes of Hualalai at an elevation ranging between 1,480 to 1,600 feet with slopes ranging from 10 to 15 percent. The project site is somewhat trapezoidal in shape with boundary lengths ranging between 907 to 1070 feet. The project site's north, south and east property lines share common boundaries with existing Homestead Roads. The project site is currently vacant of any structures and was formerly cleared and planted in ornamental plants such as dracena, avocado, ti, coffee, and various patens along with shrubbery growth due to lack of care. 15. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses: The project site is situated approximately 700 feet mauka of the Mamalahoa Highway. Between the project site and the Marualahoa Highway are lands zoned A -I a by the County with lot sizes ranging from '/2 -acre to approximately 5 acres. To the north, south and east (mauka) of the project site are lands zoned A -20a. In 1997, the County Council approved a request by Robert F. Greenwell, L.P. to rezone approximately 85.4 acres of land located about 1,000 feet northeast of the project site from an A -20a to an A- 10a zoned district to allow for its subdivision into 5 parcels ranging from 10 to 36 acres in size. In 2002, Robert K. Greenwell submitted a request to rezone approximately 26.198 acres of land located about 1,000 feet north of the project site and immediately makai of the 1997 rezoning from an A -20a to a. FA -1 a zoned district. Mr. Greenwell's proposal was to subdivide his property into 23 one -acre sized lots. The Planning Commission voted to forward a favorable recommendation of this recent change of zone request to the County Council. Mr. Greenwell has since withdrawn his change of zone request from further consideration. 16. FIRM: According to the Flood Insurance Rate Map prepared by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the project site is located within Zone X, an area outside the 500 -year flood plain. 17. ALISH System: According to the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) Map, the majority of the project site is classified as Other Important Agricultural Land, that includes lands other than Prime or Unique Agricultural Lands that are also of state-wide or local importance for agricultural use. About one-fourth of the project site along its northeastern corner is not classified. 18. USDA Soil Conservation Services Soil Survey: Soils on the subject property consist of the Honuaulu Series (HVD), which are comprised of extremely stony silty clay loam, 12 to 20 percent slopes. Permeability is rapid, runoff is slow and the erosion hazard is slight. This soil is used mainly for pasture and coffee. 19. Land Study Bureau: The Land Study Bureau's overall master productivity rating for agricultural use of soils found within the area of the subject property is Class "C" or "Pair". 20. Floral/Faunal Resources: No formal floral or faunal surveys of the project site were conducted. In its application, "the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the subject site." According to the applicant, the project site has already been cleared in the past and planted intermittently with ornamental plants, fruit trees, and coffee. The applicant also noted abandoned coffee and avocado trees, a few monkey pod and African tulip trees, and undergrowth consisting of lantana, Christmas bevy, and ivy gourd. Likewise, the project site is not known to be a habitat for any endangered or rare species of animals. The applicant acknowledges that the Hawaiian hawk (Po) and the Hawaiian owl (Pu'eo) may be found in the project area. 21. Archaeological Resources: An archaeological inventory survey of the project site was conducted in June 2000 by Rechtman Consulting. This survey identified a total of six (6) archaeological sites within the project site consisting of two (2) agricultural complexes and fora- (4) walls. All of these features were deemed important for their informational content and that preservation of these features were not required. No further work on these features were recommended. 22. Cultural Resources: According to the applicant, "the subject site is not adjacent and/or proximate to the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. It is not known whether the subject or immediate surrounding area was used in the recent past for the gathering of plants by native Hawaiians. However, as the site was partially planted with avocado and coffee trees, as well as ornamental plants like ti and dracena intermittently in the past, it would appear unlikely that the site would serve cis a native Hawaiian gathering site today. " In the unlikely event that legitimate gathering claims are made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provided the needed access within his property. Based on the above, it does not appear that the project would have any potential adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. " PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 23. Access: Access to the project site from the Mamalahoa Highway is provided by a Homestead Road that maintains a pavement width of roughly 10 feet within a 20 -foot wide right-of-way. The Mamalahoa Highway is a County -maintained roadway with a pavement width of 18 to 20 feet within a right-of-way ranging from 40 to 50 feet. 24. Water: Water to support the proposed two -lot subdivision can be made available from the County's water system along the Mamalahoa Highway. According to the applicant, two water meters have already been purchased from the Department of Water Supply, with each service intending to service each of the two proposed lots. Both an "elevation agreement" and an `but -of -bounds agreement' were executed by the applicant with the Department of Water Supply allowing these two meters to service the subject property. The Department of Water Supply has confirmed the presence of the two existing service laterals, but will require the construction of additional water system improvements should the subject property be subdivided. Details of these recommended improvements are outlined in a memorandum from the Department of Water Supply attached as Exhibit B. 25. Wastewater: The applicant indicates that wastewater generated by the proposed two lot subdivision will be serviced with systems meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health. 26. Solid Waste: The nearest landfill is the West Hawaii Landfill at Pu'uanahulu, which was designed to serve as the regional solid waste disposal facility. 27. Utilities: All necessary utilities are or will be made available to support the proposed two -lot subdivision. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 28. Department of Land and Natural Resources: (March 10, 2003 memorandum) "The Department of Land and Natural Resources has no comment to offer on the subject matter." 29. Department of Health: (March 7, 2003 memorandum) "A portion of the proposed project is located within 1000 feet of a public drinking water source. One individual wastewater system will be allowed to be used for the project and must either contain an aerobic unit with disinfection or a non -discharge disposal system if located in the portion within 1000 feet of the public drinking water source." 30. Department of Transportation: (February 21, 2003 memorandum) "The application's (sic) proposal to subdivide and rezone a lot for a dwelling, crop cultivation and cattle grazing will not have an impact on our State highway facilities. The principle road (Route ISO) serving the site falls under the jurisdiction of the County." 31. Department of Environmental Management: (February 12, 2003 memorandum) "We have reviewed the subject application and offer the following comments: • Commercial operations may not use transfer stations for disposal. • Aggregates and any other construction/demolition waste should be reused to its fullest extent. • Ample room should be provided for recycling. • Greenwaste may be disposed of only at the drop sites located at the Kailua and Hilo Transfer Stations." 32. 33 34 Police Department: (February 21, 2003 memorandum): "Staff has reviewed the above -referenced application and has no comments or objections to offer at this time." Real Property Tax Division: (February 14, 2003 memorandum) "Comments from the Appraisal Section: There are no comments at this time. Comments from the collection section: Status of real property taxes: Current Real Property taxes are paid through December 31. 2002." Department of Public Works: (March 14, 2003 memorandum) "We reviewed the subject application and our comments are as follows: B UILDING Buildings shall conform to all requirements of code and statutes pertaining to building construction. DRAINAGE 1. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared, and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of DPW. 3. The applicant shall be informed that if they include drywells in the subject development, an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit may be required from the Department of Health, State of Hawaii. EARTHWORK 1. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code. The applicant shall comply with chapter 11-55, Water Pollution Control, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Department of Health, which requires an NPDES permit for certain constriction activity. ROADWAYS I . The Homestead Road, fronting the subject property, is not a County maintained road. 1t has an approximate 10 -ft. wide pavement (in fair condition), within an approximate 20 -ft. wide right-of-way. It presently serves 4 structures. The Subdivision Code requires that any road serving a subdivision of lots 3 acres or more in size have a 20 foot pavement section in a 50 -foot wide right-of-way. Access to the proposed parcel from Mamalahoa Highway shall conform to the Subdivision Code. 2. Having checked the existing approach at Mamalahoa Highway, intersection sight distance is not adequate. All sight distances shall meet the requirements of the Hawaii Statewide Uniform Design Manual or the AASHTO Standards. Mamalahoa Highway, the County road serving the subject property, is a secondary arterial road. It has an 18-20-11. wide pavement within a variable right-of-way width (approximately 30-11. wide in the vicinity of the proposed project). It is substandard based on width, alignment and roadside hazard clearances. 4. All driveway connections to a County road shall conform to Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, of the Hawaii County Code. Driveways shall conform to County standards details R-37 and R-38. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Kiran Ender of our Kona Engineering Division office at 327-3530." 35. Department of Water Supply: See Exhibit B - Memorandum to Planning Director dated March 27, 2003 AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS OR OBJECTIONS 36. Fire Department. PUBLIC COMMENTS 37. No comments regarding the subject change of zone application has been received from the general public. "o APPLICATION FOR COUNTY REZONING (A -20a to FA -3a and A -10a) JAMES B. DUSEL KEALAKEHE HOMESTEADS, FIRST SERIES KEALAKEHE, NORTH KONA, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 7-4-03: 007 Prepared For: James B. ousel Prepared By: Sidney A Fuke, Planning Consultant January 2003 OXHISIT A rOUNFY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT (T)Te or legibly print the requested informatiolt) .APPLICkN?':lamra9. r t=, _ --- �in�v IiFii`E P a. Box 2264 ADDRESS: _: Kadua-Kona, W 9,745 -??64 LIS I AFPUCAN T'S FN'Tc ©.EST IF MOT O'JNER: Purchaser of a avao`o „f suhie� p enz z C.ISTPRINC IPALIS) INCLCfDIN(-jNAME S OF MAEV OFFICERS: PHONE:(Bus._t9�7-3313 _�_-- -.-.__-(Res,).(Fax L9. 1.3313 e LANDOWWFR(S): jaim Metucha and Srefnnie_Gelm_oot ��_-- LANiNJWNER SIGNA'I'[IRE(S): ✓ � TF: rmsO *EID1ca ADBPEu$'-12rg,._,_ T;M-JaaryiSYbe by t 1 Ke'•t :i'.on3. ni �6 i�iu ___.._�. REQ1 F.ST: A-20 TO A- I0a and FA -3a TAX MAP KEY: '7-4-03 07wong �nj': IPrrpo%ed Zoning, STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 74-4839 Mamalahoa HiRhwav SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 21.7?5 acres AGENT: Sidney M. Fuke ADDRESS_ 100 Pauahi Strear, suite 213._ - 14110, tC 96720-:1046 TELEP]40NT:: (Bus.) 969. -1sz? (Res.)tL6W9 (Fax)_96s_^q% Please indicate to whom origiml correspendeuce and copies should be semi. ORFOIINM . itri r Km c;c)Pres: Lames ts„s�l (, Set Itt tvictions on Reverse Side) iG E71 /^C^i 3303 Gly :_k�7 BiJ"-35y-?9U6 �. FU4!E. �:_l':fJhIZNG PAGE ATTACHMENT Agricultural Rezoning PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAII APPLZCATIGN FOR CHANGE OF ZONE if your request is approved, do you intend to subdivide the subject land in accordance with the approved change of zone? Yea If yes, please answer the rest of question 1 ,Ind then to question 3. a How many acres of the requested area do you intend to subdivide? 11+ W3 bo Into what lr.t sizes? 3 & 1E s C_ if your request is approved, approximately how long after the a• date of approval do you expect to submit your subdivision plans to the Planning Oeoartment for preliminary approval? Imonth d. Do you intend to build houses on the newly created lots? •vim If es, please answer the following questions: On how many of those lots? I At what aDu=,X+izate price ranged 1{O'18e $150,000 Lot $150,000 Total $300,000 Approximately how long, after approval of the subdivision, would the first house be available for occupancy? Iyear If you intend to subdivide, please submit a preliminary schematic subdivision plan together with your change of zone application form. Had ?. ?f you have no firm pians cf subdividing the subject area, do you intend to: Sell or lease the land to someone who has firm plans? ° Gell or lease the land to someone who has tentative plans? _ 3el_ or lease the land to someone who has no olans? Keep it? P n 9 °./Ad i 5 Tf you intend to do either a, b, c, please eiabcrat.e on the kind 50 of plane the other party has. Please, a' inc�ude in your approximately how so—on afr.er approva_ of yol.r rezoni`4 do you expect to transfer '.he subject land to another party. Do yo: think that lour r®quest and your further p:.ans scr the la: -.d will alleviate ch.I'D al Nous ng situation? Yes B_`.�rov__idin& additiaul baht) a+ dr �ahtl, aad theYeb} reetociak pamnil�l &mwna._ _,�,�,.�__ Are there any buildings on the subject area? k!n If sc, what kird? What do vo„ 1.nlend to do wLth those buildings if your request is approved? Is the sublect sand currently being used f)r am, agricultuz62 aetiv:.tY? Yes if so, please l.st the kinds of products groin and Dn how many square feet or acres of land per product. About 2-I acme in oof%e, evil tris, ti lest; and dnemm ._... was your request t;; allow for the creation of smaller agricultural _ots? Yes if so, did your pl,�n include -he Poll,wing eor.si:erations4 a. Commodity to be. produzed? ?Wily What kinds of c,,omodity? h. Suitability of the proposed lot size for that oomm)dity? Yea .. Suf tic :ent f6m Size to a!iow e i.' uiliCv v. ;:uoc.C99 �n cpmmercial agriculture? YON 01; 213 / 2 IJ 9 e15: F]7 9e2—N59- _. =Jk:E, PLGN',114,' d, Rgricultucal leases or other forms of assurance that potential buyers or leases would rut the subject area into some form of agricultural use? �Iease state the propesed type of arrangement. Please submit your agricultural plans for the subject area and present evidence of ccnsiderstion of the above requirements together with your request for a change of zone. If you do not intend to subdivide the subject land for come sort of agricultural purpose, please state your other reasons. so Bad 7• To your knowledge, has there been any flooding and/or drainage problem on the subject area? NO ?f so, please describe the problem_ �• Do you think that the roads leading to the subject area needs improvements? 11 so, what kind: No is the road adequate for the proposed traffic valuume or load? Yes ?• wnat sort of governmental assistance and/or improvements do you fee]. will be r_eeded in the subject area when developed? Yes No a, Schools o. Roads L: , Sewer d. Drainage -3- x x -'!I'U-� iF F,_n. F. 'i.l'1; I LIn Yes p, Police Proteetioa Fire Prcrectio� c Recre_ricna- PacilitieQ Other X 3C X i4i" 0'' No ;-or those checked "yes", please elabo=are what type kinds of improvements ar:i! r assistanr.P ara needed. Address: P.q;�OxL'64 '^ 0 Celenhone: 937-3313 '):]Le: ftauaSy 17,2(303 - 4-- COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT COUNTY REZONING REQUEST (A -20a to A -10a & FA -3a) JAMES B. DUSEL KEALAKEHE, NORTH KONA, HAWAII TAX MAP KEY: (3) 7-4-03: 07 L INTRODUCTION Fhe applicant, James B. Dusel, is proposing to rezone a 21.725 -acre parcel from Agriculture (A -20a) to Agriculture (A -10a) and Family -Agriculture (FA -3) district in Kealakehe, North Kona, Hawaii. (See Figure 1) The property is located on the mauka or east side of the Old Mamalahoa Highway, approximately 1 mile south of the Mamalahoa Highway/Palani Road junction. If approved, the :applicant and the landowners intend to subdivide the 21.725 -acre parcel into two (2) lots, one consisting of 3+ acres and the other, 18.726+ acres. The applicant plans to purchase the 3+ acre lot. He then intends to cultivate a coffee farm on the lot, as well as construct his dwelling on it. The remaining larger parcel would be kept by the landowners. 11. PROJECT LOCATION As noted earlier, the subject area is generally located about 1mdle south of the Mamalahoa Highway- Palani Road junction. More specifically, it is located approximately 500 feet south of the Makua Lani Christian Science School and about 700 feet mauka of the Mamalahoa Highway. It is "sandwiched" between two 20 -foot wide Homestead Roads. (See Figure 2) III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Concept and Components The applicant intends to purchase a 3+ acre portion of the subject parcel with the intention of constructing his home and improving the undeveloped site into a fruit orchard and coffee farm. The balance of the site will be retained by the present owners, who intend to utilize a portion of the site for cattle grazing. A minimum 3 -acre area would be cultivated into a fruit orchard and coffee. It should be noted that the A -10a zoning is being requested, as the site (after the subdivision) would not meet the minimum lot size A I PAGE 47 B HONG OHAU C PALANIJCL. U KEALA i HE Ei,YSee Page Karako - nolox° Q Seepage 43 Orcha.�/y � Ha(I'a Silver Oalr�ifr�r dF Raloko 11 �y M kalapua O Rd �O Vao Sx aa.hl O Ka[oko Kakau Pl a v � Housetots ,p0 0 17. a ��9 0 o J �lkaPl vPO Itaouap � Rch —_ �e o, l MILE HONOKOHAU c (PALANL JCT) �74-4859 w' L k"almahno Hour�ng S m 2 Kona Montessori Scl e Im 3 L. Lenl Ekah; 1� i lacA LHall Mem }/ausmg ^ O 6 La'!lant Ekolu p, i Paniolo aAb93 'yaxe Country \ paved _ 'b 3 �� ��a paved T Maw ` Hanokohau T Ha°K J6ea-�� Christ. Scl. well site a ice,\\.FF`ee,tff � A — �_ alekaPl 36.n� vim- 74 67 SUBJECT SITE Roma 4� r Dai a Yveo-1 , _ K01010 Hareo. CRocho _m f eo+�- dale Meadows 4s we«- Est A Lsa L� m m d o e o„ Au Ulua o xa;ma III,. NaA�. it.�'♦•' d, d6a iA �asA;x/� 0 p4-5031 s P°i di d� 'ai4 -Toms Tu / ---h7 p°jLd 64� 4 ealakeb� d.F� ��m x\�i xa gora�I �'O ° a Spb\ Est �� v ^a' v v arm Q a� I �,I Hule sAoaKa CA d W A Alf oaa1.. ��e d k lauoli PI A A'dma¢y,�.°s A odA, ��°tea\°4\ �f water okaAx� �d PUMP f limeniPI- 5 g fe o KEALAKEHE 3jk a il a p� �6a�oucaorataa; - aat r - ed E rv� _ ,-7 roughly P � - - Keopu��o thor% I ( t Figure 1 Lan, Est C'axc\ A B I C See Page 50J L E I P '�1,1 .M P ,q A PC b ,C.. d� \J.Li 1�� n (.a b) �dYJ� O✓ � `i JJ act. iII V1 Lyv- 2 I > Stu' y Pa%cel ,777 i requirement of the A -20a zone. It would have only 18+ acres. The landowners have no intention of further subdividing their property. Although an additional farm dwelling permit could technically be applied for, the applicant believes that a conventional 2 -lot subdivision would be more appropriate. This would make financing of the Proposed dwelling and any loans associated with the fruit and coffee orchard less cumbersome as well as provide some measure of conveyance flexibility in the future. (See Figure 3) The applicant further believes that while the coffee industry is supported by large-scale, commercial farms, the smaller, family- owned farms make a significant contribution to the industry. There are quite a number of families in this area raising coffee on less than 5 acres of land, mostly for supplemental income. It is understood that the subdivision plan submitted herein may change prior to receipt of final subdivision approval to accommodate County subdivision requirements and appropriate conditions of approval. B. Proiect Timetable and Cost The applicant hopes to secure the necessary County rezoning approval as soon as possible and begin the subdivision process immediately thereafter. Tentatively, plans call for having the land subdivided before the end of this calendar year. The estimated cost of improvements, if any, would be less than $30,000 for new water meters to each of the lots and possible improvements to the driveway access. IV. INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The subject area is designated Agriculture. Based on the size of the requested area, no State Land Use Commission action is required. The County of Hawaii can process the rezoning request. B. County General Plan The County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map designates the most of the site Orchard. This AG ROAD i— 6 0 (A -20a TO,,A-3a ZONING) (--'.GOO ACRES) mb � � b a1. = A z n 1 Kowa C. E— Ines C-1 - 62,2 to �' K. Kopao CT) l� I•� JIQJ9 LOT 2 21.725 ACRES of KCALAK£Hf HJAICSICAOS, fiR_'r SCHIES l e (A -20a TO A-1 Oc ZONING) (18.725 ACRES) � L K. Yo^ Lw f�– a1 C-7-�_ Cj-- L. w y SW7 -� 2. -FT. 16. f /man nf Sl,rvv y ,I movoiiooly Iax ' n lcm neJ by nufs.dv cc ,Rule l (F.) a_U,Sopf—Scr IG, Yetl. J•���r.e r'M: 3L1>rT Df.GCf2 (0h'+K27f) p-K:0. wB.. S csr�. nSam— - fi^ dN1�1' °d1it"+4YE',S�C vi4.aI:--rr5 l -"Do5Ji;7. N—a 96110 �1�a9 I.:/$Ri 9o9w.0757G4lr_c0Cr]- lf a19 ]17 479S:aaiSL � . naaxav LOQ" 2 OF THE KERLAKEHE hIOMEsTEADZ FIRST .SERIES Being the Whole of Orem 6272 to K. Kcp ac At La&aIckehe. North Kane fs!ord and County of Hawai6, Strafe of hlawfaii j Gil pNafCSSIJI'IAL r I LAl10 `�Y\ \:1K cu, , :Na .51fi, rrr�cu.aso r.u. Sa.•1 y,?' e(aia�o, �e.o r'�C..1'1 [0l .vnmee/ t5-.J.fl PRO./M Iva: .... 17094 RAIL .......... DCC£),f' R 4. .2002 1111[0 U00A• 1YQ:. , )AA' AUP KCr:. .. 7-4-0j: 07 (3RD 01111S10N) P designation refers to "Those agricultural lands which though rocky in character and content support productive macadamia nuts, papaya, citrus and other similar agricultural products." The proposed revisions to the General Plan, now under consideration by the County Council, do not have any changes in this area. As such, based on the requested Family -Agriculture (FA -3a) and A - 10a designations, the project would be consistent with the current and proposed General Plan, and no amendments would be required to effectuate this rezoning. C4 Draft Kona Regional Plan This plan attempts to further define the General Plan and serves as a guide for decision -makers. In 1984, it was adopted by the Planning Commission The County Council has not, however, adopted it. The Land Use Concept map of this plan identifies the A -5a designation for this area. This designation suggests agricultural uses, with lots no smaller than 5 -acre. Although the requested FA -3a zoning may not be numerically consistent with this designation, the proposed uses should not be violative of the agricultural objective. It should also be noted that the net effective density of this entire request would still average 10+ acres, making the request generally consistent with the recommended 5 -acre density of the draft Kona Reqional Plan. D. County Zoning The County zoning of the subject property is Agriculture (A -20a). Properties immediately to the north and south are also similarly zoned. However, properties immediately makai of the subject property are zoned A -1a. There was a property less than 1,000 feet north of the subject site (TMK: 7-4-06: 006) that was recommended for approval by the Planning Commission for a FA -1a zoning. The request was subsequently withdrawn at the County Council level. if approved, the site would be subdivided in a manner meeting with both the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Further, all uses and standards consistent with the requested FA -3a and A -10a zones would be adhered to. 3 E. Relationship to SARA Obiectives and Policies The site is not located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). As such, no SMA Use Permit would be required. However, as the entire island falls within the State Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Area, some discussion of the request's relationship to the CZM Program follows. The site it: not adjacent to the ocean. It is more than three (3) miles from the shoreline. As such, the proposed action should not have any adverse impacts on the area's coastal recreational and marine resources nor have any impacts on beach protection. The likelihood of this improvement having any impacts to the area's historic resources is remote. As noted in the archaeological report, there were: some agricultural complexes and boundary walls on the site that were deemed important only for their informational content. The information was noted and no work is being recommended for these sites_ Nonetheless, should there be any inadvertent finds during the subdivision and development phases of this project, work will stop until clearances are received from the appropriate County and State agencies. The proposed action will involve the construction of improvements in a non -urban setting. Accordingly, there is a potential visual impact to the area's scenic and open space resources However, the project would involve the construction of a farm dwelling on each of the respective lots. Further, the site is not visible from the Mamalahoa Highway and thus any visual impact to the near or off shore waters as well as to slopes of Hualalai Mountain would be minimal. Relative to the Coastal Ecosystems, impacts should be negligible, if at all, as the site is located well over three (3) miles from the ocean. Notwithstanding the distance, the nature of the project — agricultural -- and the construction of only two private wastewater systems are such that potential coastal ecosystem impacts would usually not be found. The proposed action will result in creating the potential for agricultural farm lots in this area. This should thus provide additional opportunities for farming. In so doing, the project could aid the agricultural economy and the overall economic use of this site and the area in general. 4 Because of its distance from the shoreline, the site should not be subject to coastal hazards. Relative to the managing development objective, this function is more applicable to the "authority" or approving agencies. However, it is noted that the request would operate and be constructed within the scope of the Zoning Code. The subject site would be zoned FA -3a, and the requested use and design/parameters (parking, height, setback, etc.) would be consistent with said zoning. In that regard, the project would be consistent with this policy. Finally, in terms of the public participation objective, this is generally a public agency function. This is achieved through the Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) and the public hearing process required pursuant to the Planning Commission's Rules and County Council's meetings on this application. Notices of this application will be sent by the applicant to surrounding property owners of the submittal of the application, and again, prior to the public hearing. Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the requested improvements would be consistent with the objectives, policies and guidelines of the Coastal Zone Management Policies, as outlined in Chapter 205-A-23, HRS and Planning Commission Rule No. 9 relating to Special Management Area. F. Other Permitting Requirements As noted earlier, other permits would still be required. These would be of the "ministerial" variety, such as Subdivision Approval, possible Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit, and the like. V. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description The subject parcel is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalai, approximately three (3) miles from the ocean. According to the archaeological report, the parcel is gently sloping, ranging from an elevation of 1,480 feet to 1,600 feet above mean sea level. The mean annual rainfall in this area ranges between 60 and 75 inches. The wetter months tend to occur between March through September. � he mean annual temperature is about seventy-five (75) degrees Fahrenheit, with the warmer months during the summer, Because the site is situated on the leeward side of the island, winds tend to be light and variable. Slight easterly winds occur during the day, while westerly or mountain winds are prevalent during the evenings. The subject parcel is somewhat trapezoidal in shape. The makai boundary is about 1,070 feet long, tapering to about 927 feet at the top. The depth of the parcel ranges between 907 to 968 feet. Homestead Roads border the site on three sides. It is bordered on the north, :south, and east by three (3) 20+ -foot wide Homestead Roads. The proposed access to the 3 -acre lot would be from the north Homestead Road. The site is vacant of any structures. it was formerly cleared and planted in commercial ornamental plants such as dracena, avocado, ti, coffee, and various palms. However, due to lack of care, mid-level shrubbery is evident. B. Soils and Topography The topography of the site slopes slightly in a mauka (east) to makai (west) direction. There is a gradual 10 to 15 percent slope running mauka-makai. The Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating for the subject area is essentially Class "C" or fair (C54) and "E" or very poor ((E268). The "C" classification suggests the site has fair productivity potential for agricultural crops. It is of the Honuaulu and a soil series, with deep and moderately fine soil texture. The color is dark brown, and the parent material is volcanic ash. It is well drained and, because it is rocky with frequent outcrops of pahoehoe, is not suited for machine tillability. This type of soil is typical of the coffee belt. The parent material of the "E" classified area is a with Alapai. This area has very little soil material, is excessively well drained, and not suitable for machine tillability. The State of Hawaii's Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of HawaiiA( LISH) maps classify this site as being either "Other Agricultural Land" or not classified. Due to the scale of the map, it is difficult to discern the exact designations. 6 C. Natural Hazards Drainage The US Corps of Engineers' Flood Insurance Rate Mao (FIRM) designates most of the project site to be located in Zone X, areas outside the 500 -year flood plain. 2. Tsunami Hazard As the site is located over three (3) miles from the ocean, it is located outside of the Civil Defense's Tsunami Evacuation Zone. 3. Volcanic and Earthquake Hazards The United States Geological Survey (USGS) classifies the area as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 4, on a scale of ascending risk 9 to 1. The populated area of Kailua-Kona also falls in this category, while the City of Hilo is classified Zone 3. There is very little that can be done to mitigate this situation and reflects an ongoing threat to all residents and businesses in these areas. The entire island of Hawaii falls within Earthquake Zone 4, according to the County Building Code. As such, certain structural requirements will be needed and taken during the building permit process to address this seismic hazard. D. Flora/Fauna Although there were no professional surveys conducted of the floral or faunal resources of the site, the applicant does not believe that rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the subject site. The site has already been cleared in the past and planted intermittently with ornamental plants, fruit trees, and coffee. A visual inspection of the site confirmed the presence of abandoned coffee and avocado trees. A few monkey pod (Samanea saman) and African Tulip (Spathodea campanulata) trees were observed. The undergrowth consisted of patches of lantana (Lantana camara), Christmas Berry (Schinus tereheinthifolius, and the pesky ivy gourd (Cocinia grandis). Thus, floral impacts should be minimal. 7 The site is not known to be a habitat for any rare or endangered animal life. Given its elevation, however, it would be possible to find the Hawaiian Hawk /'o) and the Hawaiian Owl (Pueo). Further, the cleared and rural nature of the surrounding area would make it less likely to find endangered animal life in the area. F. Historic/Cultural/Archaeological Resources Although rhe site was cleared and used intermittently for various non - intensive agricultural uses, a commissioned archaeological survey of the site was made and found in Appendix A. The September 2000 survey performed by Rechtman Consulting identified six (6) sites. Two (2) of these sites were agricultural complexes, and the remaining four (4) were boundary walls and a wall. The survey concluded that none of these sites required preservation and further work. They were deemed to be important only for their informational content. Nonetheless, during the course of improving the site, should any unanticipated archaeological features or sites be uncovered, work will cease and the applicant will immediately notify the Planning Department. G. Valued Cultural Resources In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 9 Ka'Aina decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. Specifically, there must be a discussion of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and associated tradition and customary practices of this site. In this situation, the subject site is not adjacent and/or proximate to the shoreline. As such, gathering of marine life and coastal access is not an issue. It is not known whether the subject or immediate surrounding area was used in the recent past for the gathering of plants by native Hawaiians However, as the site was partially planted with avocado and coffee trees, as well as ornamental plants like ti and dracena intermittently in the past, it would appear unlikely that the site would serve as a native Hawaiian gathering site today. 8 In the unlikely event that legitimate gathering claims are made by native Hawaiians, the applicant intends to respect and honor such claims and provide the needed access within his property. Based on the above, it does not appear that the project would have any potential adverse impact relative to the cultural and historical resources of the area. H, Water and Coastal Resources The subject site is located well over three (3) miles from the coastline As such, coastal impacts resulting from discharge of wastewater systems from the site should not be significant. Further, being a non - coastal property, no coastal access will be affected. Wastewater from the project will be serviced by sewer system meeting with the approval and requirements of the State Department of Health. This will either be a cesspool, septic tank or related system. Noise, Air Qualitv, and Dust The Mamalahoa Highway will serve as the main access to this project, followed by the use of the Homestead Road to the site. The existing ambient traffic level in this area is quite low. As such, the corresponding noise level should be quite low. With the completion of this project, the noise level is not anticipated to increase significantly. There may, however, be short-term noise impacts associated with the construction of the infrastructure (such as water service lateral and driveway access improvements) for the proposed subdivision. In that event, contractors will be required to comply with appropriate noise and related mitigation measures of the State Department of Health. The proposed development should not generate any direct air c ualit impacts. The only discernible air quality impact could be associated with the vehicular traffic to and from the site. While there will be an impact to the ambient air quality, the impact should not be significant, as the project will increase the density by only one additional unit. Further, with higher EPA standards for automobile air emissions, the air quality impact should thus hopefully not be significant. As such, with the exception of potential construction dust in the beginning, long term dust generated by the project should be minimal. 9 Construction dust, however, like construction noise will have to comply with the State Department of Health's regulations. 11. Scenic and Visual Considerations In the Natural Beauty element of the General Plan, there are sites or areas listed as being a scenic resource. The subject site is not listed as a scenic site. However, there were a few examples cited in the Kona arerj. The most notable is the backdrop of the Hualalai Mountain. The proposed development would not have any visual impacts on this mountain and other listed scenic resources in the area. The site is located more on the lower end of Hualalai Mountain, and the normal residential height should not interfere with the view of Hualalai. VI. SOCIAL AND RELATED CONSIDERATIONS A. Surrounding Land Uses The land use in this area is generally rural/agricultural in nature. There are some small family -type coffee farms on properties makai and to the immediate north and south of subject site. Those properties are zoned (under the pre 1996 Zoning Code) A-1 a. Properties located generally mauka of the site are zoned A -20a. The village of Holualoa is located about two miles to the south, where there are urban type of uses. There are some cemeteries within a mile and a half south of the subject site, such as the Hualalai Memorial Park, Keopu Cemetery, and the Catholic Church Cemetery. Given the existing and zoned conditions, the proposed development would not be incongruous with the emerging rural -agricultural pattern of this area. B. Economic Impacts The requested zoning would have some measure of econornic impact, as it could potentially enhance the prospects for the subject site to be more intensively utilized as a coffee and orchard farm. Further, there will be some small short-term construction activity. And this could help with the area's economy. C. Agricultural Impacts As noted earlier, the site has not been intensively used agriculturally recently. Given the surrounding quasi -agricultural uses and the site's intermittent use as a coffee and avocado farm, however, its potential to be more intensively used exists. Allowing the applicant to subdivide the property into two lots would not diminish the site's agricultural potential. It would actually enhance it. The site would be more manageable from a size standpoint (3 acres and 18 acres versus 21 acres). The applicant's proposal would thus help foster the agricultural objectives by making available good-sized agricultural lots. VII. INFRASTRUCTURAL CONSIDERATIONS Immediate access to the project would be via an existing 20 -foot wide Homestead Road. This Road has a 10+ -foot wide paved section that extends to the Mamalahoa Highway. The Mamalahoa Highway has a right of way of forty (40) to fifty (50) feet in this area. The pavement width ranges between eighteen (18) feet to twenty (20) feet. There is adequate sight distance in the area of the existing access. B. !Nater There is an 8 -inch County water line fronting the Mamalahoa Highway. Water can be made available for this 2 -lot subdivision from this line, and service for two lots was already purchased by the landowner. However, as the site is serviced by an access (easement) from the Mamalahoa Highway, it does not technically abut the Highway. As such, an "out-of-bounds' agreement with the Department of Water Supply was executed. The required service elevation in this area is 1,603 -foot elevation. The placement of the proposed dwelling would be at or near this elevation. Nonetheless, an "Elevation" agreement was also executed with the Department. In sum, with the installation of the meters at the Highway, water will be made available to the two proposed lots. 11_ C. Wastewater There is no County wastewater system in this area. As such, a septic tank or cesspool system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health will be allowed. This will be done by the applicant and/or respective landowner in conjunction with the issuance of a building permit for a dwelling. D. Solid Waste Solid waste will be handled through commercial haulers or the individual homeowners into authorized landfill sites or transfer stations. With the requested FA -3a and A -10a zoning, the potential for uses with toxic or related chemical waste would be minimal, if at all. It should be noted that the applicant intends to retain most of the cleared vegetation on the site and use if for composting for his potential farm. Thus, waste from this project would be pretty much limited to the equivalent of two (2) homes. E. Other Government Services As this area is already part of the North Kona urban area, it is already being serviced. No extension of government services would be required. The nearest fire station is located in Kailua and Keauhou Mauka, less than four (4) miles from the site. The Police Station is located at Kealakehe, approximately five (5) miles from the subject site In this area, elementary schools are available at Holualoa and Kealakehe. Middle and High Schools would be available at Kealakehe, approximately three (3) miles away or Konawaena, approximately seven (7) miles away. County parks are available in Kailua, Keauhou, and Kealakehe. As such, the project should not result in the extension of any government services. Further, the required public facilities are located reasonably proximate to the subject site. ry. Other l)tillties All other utilities such as telephone, cable, and electrical services are available to the site. R VIII. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short -Term Uses of Environment and Maintenance and Enhancement of Lona -Term Productivity If the request were denied, the short-term use of the site would probably continue in low level agriculture or lay fallow. The site would not be subdivided and the landowner may eventually construct one dwelling on the site and may elect to do limited agricultural activity on a portion of the site. Given the rural (A -1a) character of the makai, there may be pressures for the subject property to be similarly urbanized or used as a large -lot gentleman estate. And from an agricultural perspective, a residential subdivision may not be the most feasible use of the site. From a long-term productivity standpoint, then, the proposed 2 -lot subdivision would provide a heightened level of possibility in having the land used for more intensive agricultural activity It would also provide a reasonable land use transition between the A- la and A -20a zonings in this area. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources The subject site is already disturbed. As such, the project should not result in an irreversible commitment of natural or archaeological resources. This is also supported by the archaeological inventory survey conducted of this site. The soil on at least one-half of the parcel has been classified "C" or fair by the Land Study Bureau, representing fair agricultural potential. This is evidenced by the abandoned coffee and avocado orchard on the site. It is thus maintained that the creation of the 2 -lot subdivision should foster and enhance, instead of remove this land from its more intensive future agricultural potential. C. Mitigative Measures The applicant intends to make improvements, if necessary, to be consistent with the subdivision process. And if construction is required, contractors will be obligated to comply with appropriate State noise and air quality standards. 13 Should unanticipated archaeological finds be discovered in conjunction with any further development of the site, work will stop (as is required by the State and County) and clearance secured before work is resumed. There is no existing drainageway on the property. Any and all required grading or grabbing work will be done in conjunction with the required permits and/or SCS Agricultural Plan. This is to assure that the development of this site does not adversely affect the drainage of the surrounding areas. Finally, there will be no person or businesses to be dislocated by this project. 0. Alternatives to the Proposed Project 1. N-0 Project Under the status quo alternative, the site will continue to remain in its quasi -fallow state. The site could also be sold to one who may be interested in farming the site. However, it would be equally possible to have the land sold at market price to a "gentleman farmer." Given the present mixture of land uses and lot sizes in this area and proximity to smaller rural lots on the makai side of the property, the site may not be utilized to its fullest agricultural potential. 2. Alternative Density Under this alternative, the applicant could seek a more intensive zoning, such as FA -1a or RA -1a zoning or for that matter, a FA -3a zoning for the entire site. All of these zoning categories would arguably be consistent with the adjoining A- la zoning on the makai side of the subject site. Much an approach, however, may nut be cofnpatibie with the policy of trying to foster more family-oriented type of agricultural activities, such as truck crops or coffee farming in this area. is 3. Evaluation of Alternatives The project's impacts to the area's social and physical infrastructure would not appear to be pronounced. Certain mitigative measures will be taken to address any possible impacts associated by the development of this project. Further, the project would be consistent with the land use objectives sought to be accomplished by the County General Plan LUPAG map. In view of the aforementioned, it would appear that none of the alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the requested FA -3a and A -10a alternative. IX. REGULATORY ANALYSIS A. General Plan LUPAG Map The General Plan provides for the long-range comprehensive development of the island of Hawaii. It provides direction for balanced growth in the County. The LUPAG map designates the site Orchard. This designation allows the requested FA -3a and A -10a zoning without a General Plan amendment. B. General Plan Polices The requested zoning would be consistent with the goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan document. For one, it may provide limited short-term economic opportunities largely through the construction of any improvements required for the subdivision More importantly, however, longer-term opportunities would be created largely in the form of small-scale truck crops or coffee farms. In so doing, the resultant project should add revenues to the County and State coffers. The project intends to be energy conscious through the use and/or encouragement of solar energy and design features to take advantage of wind patterns. Maintaining and improving the quality of the environment is important to the success of this project. The General Plan identifies five (5) 15 areas of environmental concerns - air pollution, water quality, soil pollution, solid waste disposal, and noise pollution. As proposed, the project would not be violative of any of those objectives. Aside from vehicular transmission, air pollution associated with the project should be negligible. All wastewater systems would be consistent with the requirement of the State Department of Health. This should be sufficient to address any potential groundwater or coastal water impacts. If required, a solid waste management plan could be prepared and implemented. The project will also not be a noisy one, except as may be associated with the farming operations. Any noise -generating facility - such as air conditioners - would be carefully placed to minimize their noise impacts to adjoining properties. Further, it is unlikely that this site would be used as a coffee processing plant, as it would be more economical to send the products elsewhere. The project area is outside of any floodway. Nonetheless, if required, a drainage system will be designed in a manner to protect the property as well as to minimize the volume of surface runoff generated by this development. The site does not appear to have historic sites that merit physical preservation and/or further investigation. It has already been extensively cleared and partially cultivated into a farm. This was confirmed in the archaeological inventory survey. Nonetheless, work will cease if unanticipated archaeological remains are discovered while continuing its farming operations. Work will resume only after proper clearances from the State and/or County have been received. Being under cultivation, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for rare or endangered plant or animal life appear remote. As the FA -3a and A -10a zoning would allow a residence, the project will indirectly fulfill the objectives of the housing element by creating an additional lot. The Plan also emphasizes that developments be mindful of an area's natural beauty. In this situation, the project has been used in a manner where it blends with the existing terrain. 16 As the project site is more than three (3) miles from the ocean, the usual coastal resources concern is not pronounced. There will be no interference with shoreline access. Then, too, through the use of cesspools or septic system or other acceptable form of wastewater system, impacts to the coastal water will be minimized. There will be little impact to public facilities. The wastewater system will be private. The water system will be developed in a manner meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. Vehicular access to the site, if required w ill be improved by the applicant. Schools and other public facilities are also located proximate to the, site, most of them being less than four (4) miles away. Finally, in terms of the Land Use and .Agricultural elements, the pertinent goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan note the following: Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate prupvfMJIR> a;;d mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County • Protect and encourage the intensive utilization of the County's limited prime agricultural land • The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, curi;pat;biiity with adtcIL;UfIL Lulled uSEB, availability of pubiic services and utilities, access, and public need • the compatibility of agricultural and non-agricultural uses should be carefully reviewed and where appropriate, buffers required :. � kui Ui-siyie :csir Rill I- rii l-ai deveiuprn:3i ns, sucfi a3 small-scale rural communities or extensions of existing rural communities, shall be encouraged in appropriate locations The county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment Agricultural land shall be used as one form of open space or green belt. In view of the foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Orchard designation of the LUPAG map. It would also be generally compatible with the surrounding area. There are A -1a zoned properties proximate to the subject site. There is also a FA -2a zoning about 1 mile south of the subject site. Although the soil of at least one-half of the site is classified "C" or fair, it does have agricultural potential, as evidenced by the site's partial planting of coffee and avocado trees. This request should thus encourage more intensive agricultural activities on the site. This lot size would be conducive for not only the applicant but make another lot available to one who wishes to improve another portion of the abandoned coffee orchard. The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems that would render the land unusable for the proposed subdivision and activity. C. Zoning and Subdivision The designated zoning of the site is A -20a. Should the FA -3a and A - 10a zonings be approved, the requirements of the zoning and subdivision codes would be complied, including use and related development standards. D. State Land Use Agricultural Standards As the requested lots will be more than 1 -acre, the request would not in principle violate the minimum lot size standards of the State Land Use law. All of the applicable use guidelines of said law would be adhered to. 18 An Archaeological of TMK- 3-"7-4-03: Inventory Survey '7 RC -0017 l 11 PREPARED BY: Robert B. Rechtman. Ph.D. Dennis S. Dougherty, B.A. and Matthew R. Clark. B.A. r PRFPARED FOR: John Matucha Stefanie Delmont 73-1265 Kaloko Drive Kathia-Kona, Hawaii 96740 September 2000 RECHTMAN CONSULTING HC l Ros 4149 - Kea'tw, Hawaii `)674° phone: (808) 066-7636 ^ FAX (800)406-'665 i-mnil: rechtrnnnconsult(h'aoLaxn �n I� Y Kealakehe Ahupua%i North Kona District Island of Hawaii' l 11 PREPARED BY: Robert B. Rechtman. Ph.D. Dennis S. Dougherty, B.A. and Matthew R. Clark. B.A. r PRFPARED FOR: John Matucha Stefanie Delmont 73-1265 Kaloko Drive Kathia-Kona, Hawaii 96740 September 2000 RECHTMAN CONSULTING HC l Ros 4149 - Kea'tw, Hawaii `)674° phone: (808) 066-7636 ^ FAX (800)406-'665 i-mnil: rechtrnnnconsult(h'aoLaxn An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK: 3-7-4-03:7 Kealakehe Ahupua`a North Kona District Island of Hawaii R ECHTMAW CgbNSU LTI NG Figures I. project arca location. .. . .. ... 2, 1 MK map showing study parcel.._.._ . ..... Portion ot Finerson Field nial) [ca 1905-1907] from flarnmatt ct al.( 1987) . ..... 4, Site locations within the studv area. ... ....... — ....... ..... 5. SIHP Site 22429 plan view. 6. SIHPSitc 2240 plan view 7 S I HP Site 22430 Feature D, I U- I south wall pro i le. 'Fables rahic 1. Previous Archaeological Studies in Kcalakche AhupmCa . .... . .... . 7 ['able 1. SlIlP Site 22429 Features. ... ... ...... . I'able 3. SlfTP Site 22430 PCahltCs. _..... .............. ................. ..... ............................. ......................... 14 ]'able 4. Site Significance and Treatment Recommendations .................. .. .................... .............. .......... . 22 m RC -001 I INTRODUCTION At the request of Mr. Jon Trois of C.I. Kimberly Realtors, on behalf of his clients John Matucha and Stefanie Delmont, Rechtman Consulting conducted an archaeological inventory survey of a roughly 22 -acre parcel (TMX: 3-7-4-03:7) above the Mamalahoa Highway in Kealakehe Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (Figure 1). This survey was undertaken in accordance with draft Hawaii Administrative Rules 13§13-284, dated 10/15/98, and was performed in compliance with the Rules Governing Minimal Standards for Archaeological Inventory Surveys and Reports as contained in draft Hawaii Administrative rules 13§ 13-276. Compliance with the above standards is sufficient for meeting the initial historic preservation review process requirements of both the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD) and the County of Hawaii Planning Department. This report contains background information outlining the project area physical and cultural contexts, a presentation of previous archaeological work in the immediate vicinity, and current survey expectations based upon that previous work. The report also documents project methods, contains detailed descriptions of the archaeological resources encountered, provides interpretation and evaluation of those resources, and lastly, offers treatment recommendations for all of the documented sites. BACKGROUND The following section is divided into three parts: I ) the physical description of the subject parcel, 2) the general cultural context for the area, and 3) previous archaeological studies. The background information is used to generate a set of expectation for the current inventory investigation. Physical Description The study area (Figure 2) is in the mauka portion of Keatakehe Ahupua`a in the Kealakehe Homestead tract and is bounded to the north by Homestead Road. The Upper Old Government Road forms the eastern, or mauka, boundary, and the southern boundary is defined by an improved access road. Five homestead parcels within the Kealakehe Homestead tract border the project area to the west, or makai_ Elevation within the project area ranges from 1480-1600 feet (451--488 meters) above sea level. Sato et at. (1973) classify the soils in the area as Puna extremely stony muck. The western 'h of the parcel consists of high concentrations of pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and boulders. These materials are eroded surface expressions of the bedrock formations in this area that are partially buried lava flows. The eastern portion of the study area has more developed soil but still consists primarily of weathered cobbles and boulder. This area appears to have been substantially grubbed in the past as part of a plant nursery operation that once existed on the parcel. As a result of the past land use, the natural vegetation has been all but eliminated from the parcel. Presently, the vegetation cover consists of many commercial ornamental and economically important species including: Dracena, avocado, it, coffee, and various palms. Despite the density of the vegetation in some areas, especially the Dracena, ground visibility was fair to excellent. Rt 0017 IZ / 2400 / l / V i 1 +_ 1 j � � - � � 1 _p Don � 1 � — � _ �_•_ � - � `_� � Project'r a �/ O _ A. .' Ptium I. Prolectarea location" RC -0017 JAC —!/ PLAT 06 fo P 1 A P A .-k K O A[ O �.... �\ n " Nx/.� n' [•w9 ! /fNrlPso.rrw ydf+ �/� e.,ir,a --rte— 2L GA Pa•e.. _Ll O�.WO u Y!/sllx ..G .....R v, lJ d924 hs033A', _ I�c_�+z•.__n_x.m� =S Z=z__ S 4Wa. eaee wu.• LV w-~,'. - zr Stu y f'aQcel GA -1 ANT V , lyy 11 � IOJV4. ! Y O U 4. Z9g g! iseeJ.. ' C H L O Y A bI T 1 I I II Q 34 ,43A- y .� m//sK n.na B% aX2 ANT I \� �wJ-aT �• 7 o.�Je. �•A N Li 1 25 P L.A7 02. THIRD DI YI SIDN,R' ZONE SEC. PLAT 7 .4 03 HE HiNST17S., N. KOAIAI r-lAK�AII - ONTAINING/.PA CCL .: - -- SCALE:Lin. _--zoO.H.:i .I- .....•.,. I„ap alwwmg sluay parcel. PC aai Cultural Contexts File project area lies within what has been tamed the Kona Field Sys tern (Cordy 1995; Newman 1970; Still It 1984). This area extends north at least to Ka'u Ahupua'a and south to Honaunau, west from the coastline and east to the forested slopes ofHit alaIin (Cordy 1995). A large portion of this area is designated in the Hawaii SIHP (State Inventory ofIIistonc Places) as Site 50- 10-,t7-6001 and has been determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The basic characteristics of this tgrieulturril/residential system as presented in Newman ( 19701 huse been confirmed and elaborated on by ethnohistor is d im'eshgations (Kelly 1981) and summarized by Cordy (1995). The construct is based on the Hawanan terms for the ntajoi vegetation zones used to define and segregate space within an ahupua'a. It was these native terms that were used clurin,g the Mahele to the description of land claims. Chose zones arc bands, roughly parallel to the coast, that mark changes in elevation and rainfall. The current study parcel is located at an elevation which places it within what has been formed the 'apa'a zone. The `apa'a zone is between 300 -750 meters (980-2460 feet) above sea level, with an average annual rainfall of 140 to 200 cm_ The dryland cultivation of taro, sweet potato, ti, and sugarcane dominated this zone. There ,ire, although infrequently recorded, archaeological indications of permanent habitation in the ' ij a'a (Burtchard 1995; Haun or al. 1998; Kaschko I nd Rosendahl 19X7). 1 he carlv chroniclers observed habitation at these ch r anions, but nianv of these may have been for temporary tiekl houses. Arch,ri olwlical expressions ofburial anti ceremonial treas are rare to the upper rlevnnnns (Kawachi 19891_ Kuaim are a promment feumrc of the landscape within the '(Ipa'a (Cordy 1995; Newman 1970). These are to%. , broad, Ione piles of rocks that were inultiflmctionaI. These walls were a by-product of land clearing -rock removing from the planting area. Kuain-i arc oriented upslope downslope with shorter, perpendicular connecting segments. Specific fields are thus marked by the rcct:mgnlar pattern created by the kuuhri and cross -walls. The cross -walls Function as soil traps and retamine features, creating terrace -like areas to enhance planting (Shapiro of al. 1988). Kumar can also function to move water downslope in a controlled manner, ensuring optimal distribution of the available runoff water (Kirch 1985). The presence of kuoiiri is indicative of "formal walled fields,' as opposed to the scattered planting mounds anti terraces, or "informal fields." Ho%ccver, the distribution of soils suitable for agriculture determines, in part, the locations Of the formal walled fields— the distribution of suitable soils is directly associated with older lava flows. consequently, .treas of young lava flow in the apa'it do not always have kuahri (Burtchard 1995; Hammitt of al. 1987; Haun et al_ 19(18). The archaeological record contributes to an understanding of how the Kona Field System developed over time Precisely how the record is uilerpFc ed is reflected in the various chronologies proposed fertile system (Burtchard 1995; Cordy 1995, Haun et al. 1998, Hommon 1986; Kirch 1985; Schilt 1984). fhe chronology and terminology outlined by Haun ct al. ( 1998) is used in the present discussion, and the chronological summary below is abstracted from Rechtman ct of (1999). The Kona Field System was not brought to Kona as a fully -developed system; but rather, it reflects a developmental adaptation to the arca that was concomitant with the evolving sociopolitical structure and increasing population of the island. The first inhabitants of Hawaii Island probably arrived by at IeastA.u. 600, and focused habitation and subsistence activity on thewindwaid side ofthe island (Burtchard t995; Kirch 1985; Hommon 1986). To (late, there is no archaeological evidence for occupation of the Kona region during this initial, or Colonization (Am. 300 to 600) stage ofi,land occupation. There is also little indication that during the subsequent period, Early Expansion (A.o. 600 to 1100), much activity was taking place in Kona (Burtchard 1995). through the first half of the Early Expansion Period, permanent habitation was still concentrated on the windward side. It is likely that windward residents traveled to the leeward Kona coast for resource extraction purposes (Cordy 1995). By the latter half of the Early Expansion Period, permanent habitation was beginning in Kona (Cordy 1981, 1995; Schiff 1984). Habitation was concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes, and informal fields were probably �rtuated in areas with higher rainfall. Agricultural fields and habitation areas expanded across the slopes and coastal arca of Hualllai during the Late Expansion Period ( s.D. ( 100 to 14(10) (6urtchaid 1995; Cordy 1995)_ The earliest fields may have been located in the so!nhcin Portion of the system (Schilt 1981), with new fields expanding northward over time (Ilau.n Lt :11, 1998). 4 RC -0017 The development of the extensive formal walled fields sometime during the initial stages of the Intensification Period (A.D. 1400 to 1600) marks the initiation of the Kona Field System (Schilt 1984). The development of the fields may in part be a by-product of the need to extract more subsistence resources from an increasingly limited agricultural base. Radiocarbon data indicates that the population in Kona increased dramatically during this period (Burtchard 1995; Haun et at. 1998; Schilt 1984). By the time of the Competition Period (A.D. 1600 to 1800), the environment may have reached its maximum carrying capacity, resulting in social stress between neighboring groups. The resulting hostility is reflected archaeologically with the frequent occurrence of refuge caves dating to this period (Schilt 1984). This volatile period was probably accompanied by internal rebellion and territorial annexation (Hommon 1986; Kirch 1985). During the first historic period (Haun et al. 1998), Last of the Ruling Chiefs (A.D. 1778—t 819), Kalaniopu'u was chief of the Island of Hawai'i and often resided in the Kona District. This period covers Kamehameha's consolidation of control over the island to his death at Kailua in 1819. The period ends with the overthrow of the old religion., which took place when Liholiho, Kamehameha's heir, broke the traditional kapu laws and won a battle against the supporters of the old religion at Kuamo'o, along the southern coastline of Keauhou. Early historical accounts emphasize that modem day Kailua Town during this period was a significant political seat and population center. The Kona Field settlement and subsistence system continued to operate in the area through the first few decades of the historic era (Handy and Handy 1972). The second quarter of the 19th century, the Merchants and Missionaries Period (A.D. 1820-1847), was a time of profound social change in Hawat'i. Kamehameha I died in mid -1819, and a council of chiefs supported Kamehameha's son Liholiho as successor (Kelly 1980. Liholiho gained the council's support in exchange for the distribution of the profits from the sandalwood trade and the bounty of the land that moved up the hierarchy from the various ohupua'a under his control; privileges previously retained solely forthe ruler. Within six months after Kamehameha's death, Liholiho, Ka'ahumanu, and the Queen mother Keopuolani broke the kapu prohibiting men and women eating together. This act of "free eating" symbolized the end of the entire traditional kapu system. The changes in the social and economic patterns began to affect the lives of the common people. Liholiho moved his court to O'ahu, so the burden of resource procurement for the chiefly class lessened considerably. However, some of the work of the commoners shifted from subsistence agriculture to the production of foods and goods for trade to the early Western visitors. Introduced crops, such as yams, coffee, melons, Irish potatoes, Indian corn, beans, figs, oranges, guavas, and grapes (Wilkes 1845) were grown specifically for trade with Westerners. Other commodities, especially sandalwood, were collected to purchase Western goods, often to the detriment of agricultural pursuits, The arrival of the missionaries to Hawai' i in the 1820s brought further changes to the social and religious systems of the islands. The socioeconomic and demographic changes that took place in the period between 1790 and the 1840s, promoted the establishment of a Euro -American style of land ownership, and the Great Mahele was the vehicle for determining ownership of the native land. During this Legacy of the Great Mahele Period (1848-1899), the Mahele defined the land interests of the King (Kamehameha III), the high-ranking chiefs, and the low -ranking chiefs, the konohiki. The chiefs and konohiki were required to present their claims to the Land Commission to receive awards for lands provided to them by Kamehameha III. They were also required to provide commutations to the government in order to receive royal patents on their awards. The lands were identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the land could be surveyed. This process expedited the work of the Land Commission and speeded the transfers (Chinen 1961:13). During this process all lands were placed in one of three categories: Crown Lands (for the occupant of the throne), Government Lands, and Konohiki Lands. All three types of land were subject to the rights of the native tenants. In 1862, the Commission of Boundaries (Boundary Commission) was established in the Kingdom of Ilawai'i to legally set the boundaries of all the a{utpua'a that had been awarded as a part of the Mahele. Subsequently, in 1874, the Commissioners of Boundaries was authorized to certify the boundaries for lands brought before them. The primary informants for the boundary descriptions were old native residents of the lands, many of which had also been claimants for kuleana during the Mahele. The information was collected primarily between A.D. 1873 and 1885. The testimonies were generally given in Hawaiian and transcribed in English as they occurred. The ohupua'a of Kealakehe was reserved as Government land; with only eleven kuleana claims made, most ofwhich were in the mauka portion below the current study area. The current study area is shown on a map dating to sometime between A.D. 1903-1914 (Figure 3) as having belonged to J. K. Wahinekapu. In 1914 the 21.81 -acre current study parcel s R(. 00!7 +� I y I fro #y$$ r }1 y. i \ I I e\ 1 f ^ . 6' 0 I '�•��cy�a � � c��e �`/n_4a 91 �/ Ul a fl- y d r 4A 41 M V Ntt 4 Q t; - 3 A 4(j • 4 V I ` u + '1 + �\' drrby y \ • Y 0 1 1 � 21 � :y of � "'. `k✓ :\ < a ��' .+ # lJ i Figure I. portion of Fmcrson field map ; c;i. 190 -I907'1 from Ifammatt et Ed (M)7), RC -0017 was granted to Kealoha Kapae as Grant 6272. The activities that occurred on the parcel during the Wahinekapu and Kapae tenures were not recorded. One can assume however, based on information from the many nearby LCAws (see Figure 3), that the study parcel was used for agricultural and possible residential purposes. The LCAw data also help establish a late nineteenth and early twentieth century land use pattern for the mauka portion of Kealakehe Ahupua`a. The area was primarily used for the cultivation of taro, sweet potato, and bananas, with only an occasional residential locus. During the early 1900s, more residences were established on the set aside Homestead Lands that were received as grants. These grant properties, however, appear to have been broken up and habitation in the mauka arca of Kealakehe diminished as population declined and settlements became smaller in the coastal Kona area during the Territorial Period (A.D. 1900-1959). Coastal occupation was concentrated in the small villages of Kailua and Keauhou, with permanent residences with gardens and animal pens scattered along the shoreline. Upland habitation was associated with agricultural and ranching pursuits. The project area became the location of a plant nursery focused on the growing field stock, which based on the current feral vegetation specialized in Dracena. Previous Archaeological Studies Numerous archaeological studies have been completed within Kcalakehe Ahupua'a (Table 1). All of these, however, have been for land well makai of the current study area. 'fable 1. Previous Archaeological Studies in Kealakehe Ahupua`a. Study Type of Project Elevation * Stokes (1919) Reconnaissance Survey <40 Reinecke (n.d.) 1930 Reconnaissance Survey <40 Emory and Soehren ( 196 1) Reconnaissance Survey <40 Ladd 1968 Site Testing <40 Sekido 1968 Site Testing <40 Sinoto (1975) Reconnaissance Survey <40 Soehren (1975) Reconnaissance Survey 70 Sinoto (1977) Reconnaissance Survey 80-200 Soehren (1980) Reconnaissance Survey 20-80 Soehren (1981) Reconnaissance Survey 20-80 Sinoto (1983) Field Inspection 80-200 Hammatt and Folk (1984) Reconnaissance Survey 650-750 Bonk 1987 Field Inspection 0-80 Hammatt (1987) Reconnaissance Survey 700-760 Hammatt et al. (I 9S7) inventory Survey 700-760 Walker and Haun (1987) Reconnaissance Survey 900 Donham (1990) Inventory Survey 70-700 Burgett and Rosendahl (1992) Inventory Survey 70-700 O'Hare and Goodfellow (1994) Data Recovery 70-700 *feet above sea level The Walker and Haim (1987) study was for a roughly half -acre parcel around the 900 -foot elevation. They recorded a single agriculturalfhabitation complex with eight features. Hammatt and Folk 1984 surveyed a 24 -acre parcel along the south boundary of Kcalakehe at about the 700 -foot elevation. They found no archaeological sites, but did note heavy mechanical disturbance to the property. In 1987 Hammatt et al. (1987) conducted an inventory survey on a 15 -acre parcel located between 700-760 feet elevation. That project resulted in the identification of 32 features, 17 of which were test excavated. Of the 32, 25 were interpreted as agricultural; the remaining 15 were considered habitation features. The habitation features were further interpreted as "field hale," and based on a single radiocarbon date (A.D. 1645-1950) assigned to the late pre -Contact Period. Hammatt et al. (1987) described the agricultural features as being part of the Kona Field System, but distinct from the typical dryland fields originally described (Soehren and Newman 1968) for the complex. The features they recorded are less formally arranged and exhibit localized adaptation to the particular environmental conditions of the area.. Another R riai7 interesting result of their project was that eight of the eleven "faced mounds" Were tested. Prior to resting these features were considered to he possible burials. No human remains were discovered during the testing and the features were interpreted as agricultural clearing mounds. ® Bctween 1989 and 1992, PHRI carried out an archaeological inventory and mitigation program on a roughly 950 - acre project area known as the Kealakehe Planned Community (Burgett and Rosendahl 1992; Donham 1990; O'Hare and Goodfellow 1994). This project area spanned the width of the ahupua'a and extended from 70 to 700 feet elevation. A, a result of the survey work associated with that project about 100 sites were recorded, including trails, large agricultural complexes, habitation sites, mitt burials. The data recovery effort, the recording and excavation of sites within six santple blocks covering all elevational /ones, enabled the Investigators to prepare a synthesis of settlement and land use patterns for the ahupua'a below about 800 feet. Starting at about 600 feet elevation the density and fonnality of agricultural teatures increased; itwas suggested that that elevation marked "the lower boundary of a distinct agricultural zone' (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1994:87)_ They: fuilher noted a concomitant increase in permanent habitation sites above the 740 -tont elevation, which is also supponud by the I UAw data for Kealakehe, Honokohau, and Kaloko. An additional studv was conducted in KAoho Ahupua'a (Rechonan and Hairy 1999) at an elevation similar to the current study and wnh a similar rclahonship (immediately nurkai) to the old tipper Government Goad_ In that study, eery; and middle twentieth century agoiculnucti and residential features were identified.'I heagricultural features may ongnally functioned as part of the prc Contact Komi Field Svstem, but were modified for a small-scale commctcial agnadtutal endeavor (a roadside produce st,md) CURRENT SURVEY EXPECTATIONS Based on all of the available information .about the project area (land use records, Mahele records, prior archaeological studies, maps) pre -Contact agricultural features are expected to be present in areas that have not been previously gnibbed and graded. It is further expected that these feanues may have been modified to accommodate ugriculmral reuse of the land during the late nineteenth century through recent times. It is possible that temporary -field houses" associated with Kona Field System agriculture were present within the project area, and it is also likely that twentieth century residential sites exist toward the tnaukri portion of the property, near the old Government Road. FIELDWORK Matthew R. Clark, B.A. and Dennis S. Dougherty, B.A., under the supervision of Robert B- Rechtman, Ph D., conducted It I00'Z,-coveraec nedeslnan sun ev Of -tile project area and limited subsurface testing from June 10-12, 2000. Alethods Cwo surveyors utilizing pedestrian transects spaced at a I5 -meter interval intensively surveyeathe entire project arca. Tunsects were orientated at 170.350° and contoured the existing slope. rhe locations of all sites and features identified during the field reconnaissance were recorded on a project area map using the property corner markers as primary reference points. Site documentation included: site area and erivocinmental descriptions, site and feature dimensions, presence of cultural material, and site condition and Ievcl of site disturbances. Site features were cleared of debris and vegetation to M allow tot increased recording accuracy- All lava tubes encountered during the inventory were examined for cultur.tt modifications and remains. Limited subsurface testing a as conducted at a selected feature to better determine formal type Lind function. The test unit was excavated according to nanind stratigraphic layers. All excavated matrix was passed through Y< inch hardware mesh. Excavation record forms were completed for each layer and included soil descriptions, feature descriptions, and a catalog of recovered cultural constituents (artifacts, ecofacts, cultural residues). The excavation unitwas terminated upon reaching bedrock. The test unit was photographed, a profile drawing was prepared, and stratigraphic inforanation was recorded following the U.S. tion Conservation Service guidelines and Munsell color notation. The excavated unitwas backfilled and the fwnire was ic.onstnictcd observing the original construction methods. 8 RC -0017 Results A total of six archaeological sites were recorded during the current study (Figure 4). These sites include two agricultural complexes (Sites 22429 and 22430), which are considered subsets of the greater Kona Field System (SIHP 6601), and four stone boundary walls (Sites 22431, 22432, 22433, 22434). The two agricultural complexes were assigned separate SIHP numbers because the clustering of features, in addition to being physically segregated, are formally discrete (i.e., more alike within site cluster, and quite distinct between clusters). This distinction may be a reflection of substantial historic and modern alterations to the earlier pre -Contact features at Site 22429. Site 22430 appears to have been only minimally disturbed during more recent times. fn addition to these sites, three other archaeological sites were observed that are located outside of -the current project area. The first site consists of a stone wall that parallels Site 22431, the eastern boundary wall. The wall is similar in both construction material and type to Site 1.2431 and is located approximately 6 meters mauka of the boundary wall. According to oral information provided by Mr. Charlie Aipia the walls bordered and paralleled a roadway that extended from central Kona to Waimea. Ole Government Road SIHP Site 22432 SIH P Site 22432 N Z v N N v 9 N SIHP Site 42434 N W N A y 0. 'jNP site 22434 ... - Act;ys�PcaO .. N N Y V N m N SIHP SIHP Site 22429 Site 22430 SIHP Site 22434 0 10 20 . N�, Scale in meters Figure 4. Site locations within the study arca. N R(' -n0 ; 7 The second site consists of two Histou is Period (early twentieth century) residential enclosures that are situated along the southern boundary wall. 'I he structures appear to have been constructed simultaneously with the wall; engineered breaks occur in the boundary wall that access portions of the enclosures. Historic debris is scattered throughout the enclosure area. The third site is a snauc will that is situated adjacent to the southem boundary wall and is manka of the abovc- mentioned enclosure. The wall is peipendicular to Site 22431, the southern boundary wall, and exicnds in a southerly direction for an undetermined distance. Site 22429 Site 22429 iv an agricultural complcs comprising 17 features (Table 2) located in the northwest corner of the project arca (Figure 5). The site encompasses an area 100 meters by 40 meters. It consists of4 agricultural enclosure areas (Features N, O, P, and Q), 6 (lcarine mounds JcLitures 13, C, D, P, I, and t_), 3 mouka,maka( walls iFeatures A. f. and M), 2 agricultural tenuces (I eanuccu (1 and K), and '_ areas of circular agricultural depressions Weanu,s H and 1). the ca,tcrn and s+estcnl.11(kof111C5IfcCvhilursign,votpasrhulldozmg.Subsurfucetestingwasnot performed atdic,�r: Asignificant quannty of hutonc dchris (bottlrs, metal, PA'C pipe, etc.) Was obsen'ed on the surface scatlercd about the entire,ite area- : detailed description of c:wh It :inure ;; proscnted below. Fable 2. SHIP Site 22429 Features. Fraru,r 7i'pe A Wall ----- --- B Clearing Mound C Clearing Mound D Cleanse_ Molina B Wall I' Clearing Mound G lermcc 1 [ Dcpres,com Clcanng Mound Depressions K retrace 1, Clearing Mound M Will Nr.nclosure O 1-:nu closrc P laiclosurc Q Fnclosutc Feature A Feature A is a l ineannattkahnakai wall located 8 meters south of the northern property boundary. rube wall runs parallel to the northern boundary wall (Site '2431) for IS meters (at 80/260 degrees) from the western edge property to Feature Q. Feature A is constructed of piled pahochoe cobbles and is mostly collapsed along its southern side. It ranges in height from 0.7 to 1.5 meters above gro.md surface and in width from 2 to 5.4 meters (including the collapsed nubble scatter). file wcstem end of the wall terminates in a grub pile left by bulldozing on the adjaccot property, but at one time, Fcanrre A must likely Aijuined the WCSte� it puopeitJ boundary wall (Site 22433). Feature B Feature B consists of an agricultural clearing mound located approximately 2.5 meters south of FCatnre A. "file mound is constructed from piled pahoehnr cobbles and is roughly oval in shape. The mound is 2.3 meters (N/S), by 3 meters ( F/W t and ranges in height from 0.7 meters (upslope) to 1.2 meters (downslope). One large tree and one tree sornp are found at the western base of the mound. 10 Feature 0 Feature M Bulldozed Area 71. Feature I Feature Af_l�<' Feature E Feature D Feature M SIHP Site 22433 Circular Depression Ntrue Scale in meters Road Cut Grub Pile Feature K Feature M 7 A5 Feature L Feature F Feature P Feature J Feature G S I HP Site 22431 Feature 0 Feature M 71. Feature I Feature Af_l�<' Feature E Feature D SIHP Site 22433 Circular Depression Ntrue Scale in meters Figure 5. SIHP Site 22429 plan view. 11 RC oo l Feature C Feature Cis a clearing mound that is located approximately 2.5 rneters west ofFcature R. The mound is constructed from piled pahochoe cobbles and is roughly oval in shape. The mound is 4 meters wide (N/S) and is 2.8 meters (E/W) and ranges in height from 0.4 rneters upslope to 1 3 meters downslope. 'file mound IS situated in a natural depression and the surrounding dopes range from 10-20"L. Feature D Feature D consists of a clearing mound that is located approximately 1.25 meters west of Fcature C. The mound is roughly oval in shape and has a height of 0.7 meter,. The mound measures i meters IF W) and 1.5 motors (N,S). The western portion ofthe mound ha; collapsed and is dispersed into the. surrounding area. The slope m the immediate area surrounding the mound ranges from 20 300o„ Feature F Feature E is a linear rnauka in(Ani (8) 260 degre(Ls) wall located approximately 7 to 10 Meter', south of Fcature A. The wall runs 23 meters from its western end (R meters from the western propertv boundary) to Feunre N and is constntctul of Slacked and piled paltoehor and 'a'a cobbles. Wall height varies from 0.5 to I meter above ground surface and wall width range:; from 1.4 to 2 nmrcn A tclative.lI large natural cobble field and bedrock outcrop occurs to the area south of the wall. Feature 1: has been impacted by the growth of several large trees throughout its central portion. (Feature F Fcature F is a clearing mound smtated appuoxunately 2.5 meters southwest of I cantle N_ This oval mound consists of tclatively large pahochoe and ai cohNes and hotfoots_ The mound has a diametor of 2.3 meters and stands (1.65 meters above -,round surfhce. Feature C Fearne (i is an agricultural terrace situated approximately 2.5 meters west of Feature 1�, The terrace is constructed from pahoehoc and 'a'a cobbles, and i, 3 meters ( Ni S) by 2 meters (F/W). It ranges in height from level with the ground surface (upslope) to I meter (downslope). t he tcaftri is situated in a natural depression with a high concentration of cobbles and bedrock outcroppings Feature H Feature It comprises nine unculat depressions that are each excavated Imo an existing cobble strewn low-lying arca located west of Feature U The depressions are approximately I meter in diameter and range in depth from 20 to 5o centimeters. The removed cobbles were stacked and piled onto the surrounding ground surface to create the depressions, which seem to be opportunistically located in a natural drainage that may have provided shelter and facilitated moisture retention. Feature [ Feature I consists of large linear clearing mound that is located in It relatively flat Iving area approximately 75 meters north of Feature M. The mound is 4 5 meters ( E/W) by 2.4 meters (N/S) and is approximately 09 meters high. fhe mound IS constructed frmn piled pahoeho, and 'a'a cobbles. Corrugated roofing materials, glass bottles, and metal fragments were observed in the area sunounding the mound. Feature .1 Feature J comprises three circular depression,, arranged lineally, and excavated within a natural cohbfe-strewn drainage along the South side of the we,tcnt segment of Feature M. Like F'earure H, the depressions are app�oximately I meter in diameterand range in depth from 20 to 50 centimeters below ground surface. Cobbles were removed from the depressions and stacked around their edges to create a sheltered. moisture retaining arca suitable for agricultural purposes. Feature K Fcature Kis an agricultural tmrace and ttvo associated circttlar depressions (like those previously described in Fcature f and 1) located 2.S motors southeast of Fcature N. The terrace is constructed of piled pahochoe and 'a'a cobbles, and ntaruires 19 meters (E/W) by I meters (N, S). 'Che terrace wall stands 0.8 meters above ��mund surface and contains levoi s.)ii on the upslope side. 1? RC -0017 The two circular depressions, located directly adjacent to the terrace wall, measure approximately 0.8 meters in diameter and between 10 and 50 centimeters in depth. A corroded 55 -gallon drum and a clear glass jug were also found at the base of the terrace. Feature L Feature L is a clearing mound located 2.5 meters south of Feature N. This oval mound is constructed of medium to large pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. Feature L measures 1.5 meters (E/W) by 2.5 meters (N/S) and stands 0.5 meters above ground surface. Feature M Feature M is a linear stone wall that is orientated mauka/makai (90/270°) and is constructed from small to medium pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. The wall is 88 meters in length and can be divided into three segments based on condition and form: a western, a middle, and an eastern. The dimensions and characteristics for each segment are listed below: Western Segment– The western wall segment is approximately 22 meters long and is collapsed along most of its course. The collapsed width dimension ranges from t.2-2.4 meters and the height ranges from 30 to 50 centimeters (north side height) to 1.2 meters (south side height). A natural depression (drainage feature) occurs along the south side of and parallels the wall. Middle Segment–The middle segment of wall is approximately 37 meters in length and extends mauka from the western segment. The wall alignment makes a slight curve to cross the previously mentioned depression. As the wall continues mauka it roughly maintains the same orientation as the western segment. The middle segment is relatively well defined but is smaller than the previous segment. This portion of the wall is also collapsed along most of its course and terminates at a bladed road route. The wall dimensions for this segment are: 0.5-1 meter north side height, 20 to 50 centimeters south side height, and the width varies from 0.4-1.5 meters. Eastern Segment– The eastern wall segment is approximately 29 meters in length and extends mauka from the previously described bladed road route. The wall terminates in a previously grubbed area that most likely removed any other portions of the wall. The eastern most section of wall is more discrete than the previous sections. The north side of the wall is relatively high (due to a slight depression on the north side) and ranges from 30 to 80 centimeters above the ground surface. The south side of the wall is relatively low lying and ranges from 20 to 50 centimeters. Feature N Feature N is an agricultural enclosure located approximately 26 meters south of the northern project area boundary. The interior ofthe enclosure is a level soil area measuring approximately 38 square meters. Modem debris (glass bottles, metal fragments, PVC pipe, corrugated roofing and wooden construction materials) is scatter throughout the feature. The enclosure walls are constructed of large pahoehoe cobbles. Measurements for each of the enclosing walls were recorded and are provided below: North Wall—The north wall of the enclosure, which is a portion of Feature E, is 14 meters long and slightly curved. A small break occurs in the wall 6 meters from it western end. The wall ranges in height from 0.8-1.1 meters and in width from 1.8-2.0 meters. West Wall—The west wall is 7 meters in length, 1.3 meters wide, and ranges in height from 0.5-0.8 meters. The southern end of the wall has been significantly impacted by the root system of a large tree, and it does not articulate with the south wall, Southand East Wall–The south wall is curvilinear and is intermingled with the root system of a large tree. This wall measures 8 meters long, 0.5-1.0 meters high, and 1-3 meters wide; and is dispersed at its eastern end, where a trace alignment continues and forms the east wall of the enclosure. This side of the enclosure is less defined than the other walls and measures 5 meters long, 20-50 centimeters high, and LI meter wide. 13 R( OW Feature O Feature O is an enclosed, relativcic cobble free agricultural arca (12 meters (N/S) by 10 meters (E/W) abutting the northern will of Feature N. "fhe area is hounded to the north by a partially faced, stacker) pahoehoe cobble wall located 7 meters from, and parallel to, the northern properly houndary wall (Site 23431). The north side of the feature is approximately meters wide and stands up to 0.8 meters above ground surface. Feature O r5 bounded by Feature N to the south. (see Feature N north wall description). 1 he arca is partially bounded to the cast incl west by short, largely collapsed, piled ndhoehoe cobble walls. The eastern ,vall c.xtenck, at a richt angle, 3 meters )morn the northern wall. It measures up to 2 meters wide and stands up to 0.8 meters ahoy c around surface. file western wall extends, at a right angle, 6 meters north of Fcature N. It measures up to -I metro wide (iuclurhng collapsed rubble portions) and stands as high as I meter above 11uund surt:ucc. Glass jars, bottles, and pohvin l (donde (PVC) Pipe .%cre found within the enclosure. Feature P Fcatuie P k an enclosed (relatively) cobhle free agricultural arca (I1 meters (N/S) by 8 meters (E/) -V)) directly makar (down slope to the west) of Feature O. The urea is bounded to the north by a stacked pahoehoe cobble wall measuring up lu ' meters wide and 0.8 meters about ground surface. The wall is located 7 meters from the northern property houndary Sac'3131) and appears to be it continuation of the northern wall of Fcature O. A piled pahoehoc cobble wall (I .s meters v, ole and 0_2 meters above ground surl.rce) extends, at a right angle, 6 meters from the western end of the enclosure arca's north wall, Forming Fcature P's partial tcestcrn houndnry. To the south. Feature P is bounded by Feanre E (See Feature F. dcsa ipuon ), and to the east by the we,tern wall ,)I Feature O (see Feature O description). Several large trees haere caused CtttlnClVC darnaee to the walls of Feature P ,Feature Q Feature. 0 is a small partially enclosed egnculturd area (6 meters by 6 meters) located makar (down slope to the west) of Fcature P. The arca is bounded to the west by an exposed bedrock outcrop and the eastern will of Feature P (see Fcature P description), it is bounded to the north and cast by an L-shaped piled pahoehoe wall segment (0.8 to I meter wide and 0.7 to 1 meter above ground surface) located 3 meters from the northern property boundary wall (Site 22431). fhe L- shaped wall segment rums from the western end of Feature P parallel to the property line for 6 meters and then jogs to the south for -1 meters until itfoins the eastern end of Feahrre A. The southern side of the enclosure area is open. Site 22430 Site 32430 is an agricultural complex comprising 24 features (Table 3) scattered throughout the northwestern portion of the project area (Figure 6). The features consist of three kuaAw (Features F, F, and P), five agricultural 'erraces (Features 6, M, N, O, and W), and sixteen clearing mounds (Features A, B, C, D, H, 1, 1, K, L, Q R, S, T, U, V, and X). Several of the clearing mounds and kuufwt within this complex an'. in Poor condition, having been impacted in varying degrees by the road construction activities that occurred within the project area. An access road bisects the site, which created further disturbances to clearing mound fcotures and kuaiwi_ File features recorded bear similarity to those described by I lammatt at al. 1 1987) at a lower elevation with Kvalakche.4hupua`a, particularly the configuration of kuaiwt and clearing mounds_ ➢'able 3. SIHP Site 22430 Features Feaunr Type ---------- A Clearing Mound - B Clearing Mound C Clearing Mound (� Clearing Mound Krai rvi I' Kuaix'r (i terrace ll Clearin, Mound (Tearing Mound Clearing Mound ,,,rttinucd .m rrertpage 14 RC -0017 Table 3. SIHP Site 22430 Features. (continued) Feature Type K Clearing Mound L Cleaning Mound M Terrace N Terrace O Terrace p Kuaiwi Q Enclosure R Clearing Mound S Clearing Mound T Clearing Mound U Clearing Mound V Clearing Mound W Terrace X Clearing Mound Feature A Feature A is a clearing mound located approximately 70 meters south of the northern project area boundary. It is situated adjacent to a road access corridor located in the northwestern comer of the property. The mound is 2 meters (E/W) by 1.5 meters (N/S) and ranges is height from level with the ground (road) surface to I meter (downslope). Road clearing debris is piled against the east (mauka) side of the mound. Feature B Feature B is a clearing mound located approximately 7 meters south of Feature A. The mound's irregular shape may have resulted from the road clearing debris being piled against its eastern (mauka) side. The clearing mound is 2.3 meters (E/ W) by 2.7 meters (N/S) and ranges in height from level with the ground (road) surface to 70 centimeters. Feature C Feature C is a clearing mound located 5 meters south of Feature B. The mound is relatively large and is constructed from piled pahoehoe cobbles. A large tree growing at the base of the mound and road clearing activities have created a small degree of disturbance to the feature. The mound is roughly oval in shape, 2.5 meters in diameter, and ranges in height from 0.8 meters upslope to 1.1 meters downslope. Feature D Feature D is a clearing mound located 3 meters west of Feature B. The mound is rectangular and one of the more formally appearing features. It is constructed from stacked small to medium pahoehoe and `a'a cobbles. The feature measures 1.7 meters (E/W) by 2.2 meters (N/S) and ranges in height from 0.6 meters (downslope) to I meter (upslope). The western (makai) side of the mound is partially collapsed. A 1 x 1 meter test unit was excavated within the mound. The test unit was placed to verify the function of the feature and to determine the extent of any subsurface cultural deposits. Materials identified within the unit include two paper covered D -cell batteries (EverReady brand), a kukui nutshell fragment, and flecks of charcoal (not large enough sample for collection). No burial remains were observed in the test unit. Two stratigraphic layers were identified during excavation (Figure 7). Layer I is an architectural layer that consists of stacked and piled pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. This layer extended from the mound surface to depths of 72 -89 centimeters below the mound surface. The cultural material located within this layer was intrusive, and included the two D -cell batteries. Layer II consisted of very dark grayish brown ( IOYR 3/2) silty loam that was integrated with angular gravels and relatively large pahoehoe cobbles. The layer extended from 72-119 centimeters below the mound surface, was lightly compacted, and terminated upon reaching decomposing bedrock. The cultural materials recovered from Layer II included a single kukui nutshell fragment and relatively small flecks of charcoal. 15 Figure 6. SIHP Site 22430 plan view. RC -0017 $ 1 RC -0017 �Y� \k 1�r Ql1 r�l L_ > �.--y Decomposing Bedrock Layer I Stacked rock layer 0 10 20 Layer II Very dark grayish brown Scale in (10 YR 3/2) silty loam. Figure 7. SIHP Site 22430 Feature D, TU -I south wall profile. Because of a lack of portable remains, or human remains, within the test unit and in the area surrounding the mound, it was determined that this structure was an agricultural feature and not a habitation or burial mound. Similar features were identified and tested by Hammatt et al. (1987) makai of the current project area, also within Kealakehe, with identical results. Feature E Feature E is a kuaiwi that is orientated mauka/makai (65/245°) and is constructed trom small to medium pahoehoe and ,a'a cobbles. The wall is a linear alignment of cobble piles (collapsed wall remnants) that are adjacent to and north of a relatively broad clearing area. The pile dimensions vary but are generally 0.7 meters in height and from 1-2 meters in diameter. The eastem wall segment terminates at the cleared access road previously mentioned and the western end dissipates into the surrounding sloping terrain. The cleared area south of the wall measures approximately 5 meters by 30 meters and ranges in slope from relatively flat 15%. Feature F Feature F is kuaiwi located 5 meters south of and parallel with Feature E. The wall is south of the cleared area discussed in Feature E and is more discrete than the previous feature. The wall is a series of discontinuous piles of pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles with broad areas of level soil existing within the wall breaks. The collapsed wall segments range from 1-2 meters in diameter and vary in height from 0.5 to I meter. Feature G Feature G is an agricultural terrace located 5 meters north of Feature D. The terrace wall is orientated mauka/makai and is constructed from stacked pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. A relatively flat lying and cleared area (approximately 25 m') lies north of the wall. The terrace wall is 6 meters in length and varies in width from 0.9-1.7 meters (collapsed portions of the wall are >t meter). Facing height varies from 0.5 meters (north side dimension) to I meter (south side dimension). 17 RC 0017 Feature Ft Feature H is a clearing mound located 5 meters west of Feature D. The mound is constructed from medium to large pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and Is roughly oval in shape. The mound is 2.4 meters in diameter and ranges in height from 0.4 meters (upslope) to I meter (downslope)- The makai side of the mound is partially collapsed and dispersed into the surrounding sloped area. Feature I Feature i consi a,; ofa relatiecly Fuge clearing mound located 3 meters north of Feature H. The mound is roughly rectangular in shape and is constructed from small to large pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. The southern portions of the mound have collapsed into a natural depression arca. Several trees (approximately 4-10" diameter) are present within the mound stricture. fire mound measures / meters (f/W) by 3 meters (N/S) and ranges in height from 0.2-0.4 meters (downslope) to --I meters upslope_ Feature .f Feature 1 consists of a clearing mound situated 3 meters north of Feature I. The mound is constructed from small to medium pahoehoe and 'a 'a cobbles and is slightly collapsed on the southern (makai) side. The mound is 1.9 meters (Ei W ) by '.2 meters (N/S) and is 0.6 meters in height. Feature K Feature K is a clearing mound !rented 2 nieters north of Feature J. The mound is constructed from small to medium pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and has scoeral trees growing around its perimeter. The mound is roughly oval in shape, 2. runic cs in rliamcter, and ran,es in height from level with ground surface (iipslopc) to 0,7 meters (downslope). Feature L Feature L consists of a clearing mound located approximately L5 meters north of Feature K. The mound is constructed front medium to large pahoehoe ❑nd 'a'a basalt cobbles that are place upon larger, embedded basalt boulders. "Phe area surrounding the mound is relatively steep, and the boulders provide a "foundation" for the mound The mound is roughly ova in shape and is 1.9 meters in diameter. Che height of the mound ranges from level with the ground surf ace (upslope) to 0.65 meters (downslope). Feature M Feature M is an agricultural terrace located approximately 2 meters north of Feature I, and situated on a "ridge spur'* formation The terrace consists of i circular area that is cleared away from the cobble strewn ridge formation. The mauka wall ofthe feature is 1 meter ubove the terrace surface and the cleared circular area is approximately 2 meters m diameter_ Two other circular terraces arc located makai of this terrace and each is described below_ Feature N Feature N is a terraced located 5 meters west of Feature M. The level soil area within the terrace is 3 meters in diameter, and collapsed wall debris is present within the cleared area. The upslope wall ofthe structure is relatively large (approximately :' meters wide), and the remaining walls surrounding the terrace are I meter wide and range in height from 1-2 meters. Feature O Feanue O consists is an agricultural terrace located,l meters west of Feature N. The terrace is a circular clearing area with piled and stacked pahoehoe cobbles extending around the circumference of the clearing. The clearing opening is level soil that is 2 meters in diameter. The wall surrounding the clearing is I meter wide and ranges in height from nearly level ground surface (downslope) to 0.6 meters (upslope). d�eature P Feature P consists of a kaaivi whose eastern termination location is approximately 2.5 meters west of Feature 0. The wall is constructed from piled and stacked pahoehoe cobbles, is 19 meters in length, and is orientated mauka makai (75-255"). "Circ wall is relatively discrete and terminates mauka at a cobble -strewn depression and makai at the western property houndary. Collapsed portions of the wall occur along its entire course and the resulting nibble width varies from 1.5 2 ineters and the height ranges From 0.2 -0.8 meters. to RC -0017 Feature Q Feature Q is a clearing mound located 2 meters south of Feature O. The mound is constructed from small to large pahoehoe and `o`a cobbles and is partially collapsed on its south side. A piece of corrugated roofing material is present at the base of the mound and several trees are growing within the mound structure. The mound is 2.7 meters (E/W) by 2 meters (N/ S) and ranges in height from 05 meters (upslope) to 08 meters (downslope). Feature R Feature R is a clearing mound located 5 meters southwest of Feature Q. The mound is constructed on flat lying ground surface and is relatively intact (no collapsed portions due to sloping terrain). The mound is roughly oval in shape, is 2.4 meters in diameter, and is 0.6 meters in height. Feature S Feature S is a clearing mound located 7 meters southwest of Feature R. The mound is constructed from small to large pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and is located in a relatively flat lying area. The mound is large and oval in shape with a 3.9 - meter diameter. The height of the mound ranges from 0.7 meters (upslope) to I meter (downslope). Feature T Feature T is a clearing mound located 5 meters south of Feature P. This irregularly shaped mound consists of piled pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and (rectangular). Large trees are growing within the structure and may have contributed to the irregularity of the mound. The mound is 1.7 meters (E/W) by 3.5 meters (N/S) and is 0.65 meters high. Feature U Feature U is a clearing mound located 9 meters south of Feature T. The mound is constructed from small to medium pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and is situated on flat lying ground. The mound is roughly oval in shape and relatively intact. The mound measures 2.7 meters in diameter and is 0.7 meters high. Feature V Feature V is a rectangular clearing mound located 4 meters southwest of Feature S. It is constructed from small to medium pahoehoe and `o`a cobbles. The mound measures 2.9 meters by 1.8 meters and ranges in height from 0.5 meters (upslope) to IA meters (downslope). Feature W Feature W is an agricultural terrace located approximately 37 meters cast (mauka) of the access road corridor previously mentioned. The terrace is created by a wall that is constructed from medium to large pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles. The wall width varies from 2-3 meters and is 0.7 meters high. The area west (makai) of the terrace is clear of cobbles and boulders and is relatively flat. The area east (ntauka) of the terrace has a high concentration of cobbles and boulders. Feature X Feature X is a clearing mound situated 25 meters northwest of Feature W. The mound, piled pahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles, is constructed on a ridge formation. The pile is oval and is 0.7 meters (E/W) by .85 meteis (N/S) with a height of 0.7 meters. .Site 22431 Site 22431 is a stone wall located along the northern and the eastern boundaries of the project area. The wall forms a continuous boundary along the north and east project area; the northeast comer of the wall is curvilinear and contiguous. Each segment of the wall (north segment and east segment) is described below. North Segment—The northern project arca is bounded by a piled and stacked stone wall that is approximately 309 meters in length and is orientated at 78/258°. Wall height ranges from 0.4-1.2 meters and the wall width varies from 1-2.5 meters (includes maximum width for collapsed portions of the wall). Construction materials consist ofpahoehoe and 'a'a cobbles and boulders. The lower course of the wall is relatively large boulders, partially embedded in the ground, upon which RC 0017 medium sized cobbles are placed. "t he uppermost course is small cobble material. The wall resernbles it core -filled constructed wall, but the construction technique revealed in collapsed segments of the wall indicates that the wall consists of primarily stacked and piled cobbhs and boulders. Several breaks and disturbances occur along the wall and may be the result of the semi -improved road route that fmmllcls the wall. ,\ large break occurs at 57 menu, from the western end of project area where it road access corridor was constructed. Che resulting opening is approximately 8 meters wide. A second break occurs at 243 meters from the i; estem end of the project area when it second access road was cut. File road corridor i_; approximately 13 meters wide Other disturbances occur along the wall and long segments of the wall are obscured by dense vegetation- This segment continues west (,nakca) beyond the project arca for an undetermined Icngth- Eaitcin .Segment The eastern segment of Site :'243I is relatively in tact; collapsed segments are present but there are nu major breaks or disturbances in the wall. Chis seement is approximately 286.5 meters in length and is orientated at approximately 178/358°. The wall r_ontinues south beyond the project area for an undetermined length. Construction materials and techniques are the same as those previously described for the northern segment of Site _'2431. .A second wall is present that parallels this eastern segment of Site 22431. "[his wall is located 5-10 meters cast mauka) of the eastern segment and is situated ontside of the current project area. The wall appears to br_ constructed front die same materials and with same technique as used for Site 22431, The walls were most likely constructed of or,ibout the .same time and may have been used to mark file road route that extended from central Kinlua to Waimea. No site forms were completed for this wall and derided descriptions for this site arc not included in this report as the site is located rnrtsidc of the current project area houndary. Site 22432 Site 22432 is a stone wall located on the southern houndary of the project area. I'lie will is approximately 2935 meters in length and is orientated at 75/255°. hhe wall is constructed from stacked and piled pahoehoe, and `a'a cobbles and houlders and ranges in width from 1-2 meters (including collapsed wall rubble). The lowest course of Gne wall IS made up of relatively Targe (partially embedded in the ground) boulders upon which medium sized cobbles are placed. "Chcuppermost zourse is small cobble materials. The wall visually gives the impression of being it core -tilled construction, but as revealed in the collapsed potions, consists primarily of stacked and piled cobbles and boulders. A second wall is 86 meters west of the eastern corner of study parcel, and is located outside of the current study arca. This wall is south of and perpendicular to Site 224;-1. It extends from the south side of Site 22432 in a southerly direction !(it an undetermined length. "Ilie rock that makes up this wall appears to be more weathered than the rock used in Site 12432, and the wall is stacked and tared on all sides. Site record form were not completed for this situ and detailed site ,icsci fitions for this site are not inclucb'd in this report as the site is located outside of the current project area boundaries. Two habitation enclosures are also associated with this wall just south of Site 22432, of the current study parcel. [hese enclosures are at 101 meters and 118 meters from the eastern comer of the project arca, and an engineered break in Site 22432, accessing the enclosures, occurs at 13 7 meters. Site record forms were not completed for the enclosures and detailed site descriptions are not included in this report as the site is located outside of the current project arca boundary. the engineered break in the Site 2_.1432 wall combined with the difference in construction materials of the enclosure i`,alls as compared to the boundary wall, indicates that Site 22432 was built after the enclosures. This suggests .I date of early twentieth century for Site 22432 Site 22433 Site 22433 is a stone wall located along the western (nw4m) boundary of the project area. This wall has been disturbed along most of its course; the adjacent parcels west of the boundary wall have been grubbed and developed, which has resulted in the removal of large portions of the wall. 1'he wall is approximately 355 meters in length, is orientated at 70/ 250°, and ranges in width from 1-2 meters (including collapsed rubble scatter). -flue wall is constructed from stacked and piled pahoehoe and `a`a cobbles and boulders and is built on bedrock. 2.0 RC -0017 Site 22434 site 22434 is a stonewall located in the east central portion of the project area (see Figure 4). The wall is 112 meters south of the northern project area boundary and is orientated mauka/makai. It consists of two separated segments (assumed to once have been part of a single wall). Eastern Section — The eastern segment of this site is approximately 46.5 meters in length and is orientated at 78/258°. The wall is constructed ofpahoehoe and Va cobbles and boulders and is directly on the bedrock. Construction technique is similar to the previously discussed boundary walls, where larger boulders form the base of the wall and the remaining courses decrease in cobble size with an increase in height. The wall height ranges from 1.3-1.5 meters and the width varies from 1.2-2.1 meters (including collapse rubble scatter). Portions of the wall are collapsed and there is a 5 -meter break 14 meters from the eastern end. Site 22434 is not connected to Site 22431 and is approximately 6 meters west of that eastern boundary wall. 1Testern Section — The western segment of this site is located approximately 75 meters west of the eastern section and maintains the same orientation and alignment. The wall is 10.5 meters in length and is constructed from the same materials using the same technique as the previously described segment. Both the mauka and makat ends of this wall segment are collapsed, which has resulted in relatively large (1.6 meter wide) rubble scatters. The remaining portion of the wall ranges in height from 0.5-0.8 meters and the width varies from 0.5-1.6 meters. SUMMARY As a result of the current inventory survey, six archaeological sites were identified and recorded. Three other archaeological sites (two stone walls and an enclosure structure) were also noted during the survey; these sites are located outside of the current study area and were therefore not recorded during the inventory and site descriptions are not included in this report. The expectations for this project area included pre -Contact agricultural features in areas not previously impacted by grubbing and grading. This expectation was met; two agricultural complexes were recorded. It was a further expectation that these areas would exhibit sane historic period and possible recent reuse. This expectation was also realized; one of the two sites (SIHP 22429) appeared to have been significantly modified during both historic and modem times to accommodate more recent agricultural pursuits. As for the pre -fieldwork expectation of Historic Period habitation near the Old Government Road, although no such sites were identified on the current parcel (possible as a result of the prior extensive land -altering activities), a Historic Period residential complex was noted adjacent to and just south of the current study parcel. As stated substantial ground -disturbing activities have occurred within project area boundaries that include road construction and extensive grading and grubbing associated with contemporary agricultural practices. These activities have created disturbances to the existing archaeological sites and may have completely removed others. These prior disturbance have destroyed possible associations between the sites, which effectively limits the interpretation potential. However, the archaeological resources that do exist on the property retain sufficient integrity for the evaluation site significance and associated treatment recommendations. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS The sites on the property are assessed for their significance based on criteria established and promoted by the DLNR— SHPD and contained in the draft Hawaii Administrative Rules 13§ 13-284-6, dated 1998. These significance evaluations should be considered as preliminary until DLNR—SHPD provides concurrence. For resources to be considered significant they must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: 21 A. Be associated with even', fln.t have made an important contribution to the broad pancrns of our history; B- Be associated with he lives of persons important in our past, C. Nmbody the distincti,,e characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master, or po,sess high artistic value: D. Hnxe yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or historv: F. Have an important traditional cultural value to the native I lawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional cultural practices once carried out, or still carried out, at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. The significance and recomnicnded octInients for the six sites arc dISCUSSCd below and are ['resented in Table -I fable 4. Site Significance Fridlicatinent Recommendations Site No. Fimetion Cemparai Association SigniJPcnnce lrr'etnrent SIHP 22429 Agricultural Cornpler Pre-Contact/Historic D No further work SHIP 224,30 Agricultural Complex Pre-Contact/Histone D No further work SHIP 22431 Boundary Wall Historic D No further work SHIP 22432 Boundary tall Historic D No further work SII IP 22433 Boundary Tall Historic D No further work SHIP 22434 Wall Historic D No blither work The four wall sites (SHIP 22-131, 22432,'_2433, 22434) are all assessed as significant under Criterion D as having yielded data relative to the ninercenth century transition from traditional Hawaiian land tenure practices to a Western system of land ownership. Precisely marking property boundaries was an important element in the latter system. The data potential of these sites has been realized as it result of the current study and no further work is recommended for these sues_ Site 22429 is it complex of agricultural features that at one time may have been part of the pre -Contact Kona Field System, but that have been significantly modified during both historic and more recent times. Despite this historic and modern reuse, the site nonethcics� remains significant under Criterion D for the information it has yielded relative to changing agricultural patterns in the 'apa'a zone of the Kona Field System. The documentation presented in this report has been adequate to mitigate any potential impacts to this site. No further work is recommended Site 22430 is it complex of agricultural features that is likely late pre -Contact (post n.). 1600) in origin- Portion of lhis site may have seen more recent reuse As part of the extensive Kona Field System this site is significant under Criterion D Che data rollected dunng the current investigation are sufficient for documenting this resource. It is therefore recommended that no further work be conducted at this site. L RC -0017 REFERENCES CITED Bonk, W. 1987 An Archaeological Walk-through Survey of Lower Kealakehe, North Kona, Hawaii. Manuscript. Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii -Hilo. Prepared for Belt, Collins and Associates. Burgett, B., and P H. Rosendahl 1992 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Kealakehe Planned Community Project Area, Lands of Kealakehe and Keahuolu, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-04-08:17,Por.12). PHRI Addendum Report 927-021192. Prepared for Housing Finance and Development Corporation. Burtchard, G. C. 1995 Population and Land Use on the Keauhou Coast, the Mauka Land Inventory Survey, Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii Island. Part 1: Narrative Volume. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. Prepared for Belt, Collins and Associates and Kamehameha Investment Corporation, Honolulu. Chinen, J. J. 1961 Original Land Ttles in Hawaii. Ilonolulu: privately published. Cordy, R. H. 1981 A Study of Prehistoric .Social Change.' The Development of Complex Societies in the Hawaiian Islands. New York: Academic Press. 1985 Hawaiian Island Archaeology: Ooma and KalaoaAhupua`a, Kekaha, North Kona. Working Paper 1, Historic Sites Section, Division of State Parks, Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii. Donham, T. K. 1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Kealakehe Planned Community Project Area, Lands of Kealakehe and Keahuolu, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 652-010890. Prepared for State of Hawaii. Emory, K. P., and L. J. Soehren 1961 Archaeological and Historical Survey, Honokohau Area, North Kona, Hawaii. Departmental Report Series 61-1. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawaii. Hammatt, H. H. 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance of a 15 Acre Parcel, Kealakehe, Kona, Hawaii (TMK 7-4-17:30). Cultural Surveys Hawaii. Prepared for Gerald Park, Urban Planner, Honolulu. Hammatt, H. H., and W. H. Folk 1984 Archaeological Reconnaissance for Kealakehe Houselots II Project, Kealakehe, North Kona, Hawaii. TMK 7-4-08:17. Prepared for Gerald Park, Urban Planner, Honolulu. Hammatt, H. H., D. Shideler, and D. K. Borthwick 1987 Archaeological Survey and Test Excavations of a 15 -Acre Parcel, Kealakehe, Kona, Hawaii (TMK 7-4- 17:30). Cultural Surveys Hawaii. Prepared for Mauna Lam Resort, Inc. Handy, E. S. C., and E. G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Ilawai`i. BP. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. (With M.K. Pukui) Haun, A. E., J. D. Henry, J. A. Jimenez, M. A. Kirkendall, K. Mally, and T. R. Wolforth 1998 Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program Phase I -Archaeological Intensive Survey, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, col. 1, Summary. PHRI Report 1320-052798. Submitted to County of Hawaii. R( 0017 l-lonmon, R. J. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. IN Kirch, P. V. (e(.), Lcland.Som ncc: Arrhaeological:Ippmache., to Evolution and !'mans formation: 55-88. Cambridge: University Press. Kaschko,M. W, and P H. Ro,endahl 1987 Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kealakekua Retch Makai I and Subdivision, Land of Kealakekua. South Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-8-2-92:2,33) PHRI Report 44-100186 Prepared for Ke;dakekuu Ranch, Ltd. Kawachi, C F. 1989 An Upland I dabttation and lgricultural Complex in North Kona, Hawaii Island. Master's thesis, Department ofAnthropokav, University of Hawaii. Kelly, N1, 1933 Na Mala O Kona: Garden` of Kona. AHistory of Land Use in Kona, Hawaii. Departmental Rep, t.4rncs Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu_ Prepared for the Department of rrau.,portanon, hate of Haweii. Kirch, P. % 1985 Fcathrred Gorr anis( Fishhooks_ An Innaduction to Harrauian . I rchac°olo,io' and Prehistor I, Honolulu: I Inrvel iov of Htnvuii Pres. Ladd, 1?' 1 1968 fIonokahau, Mman A Sauvage Report. Manuscript. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolaln. Newman, T. S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Fanning on the Island of Ilawaii in A.D_ 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks. O'Hare, C. R., and S. F. Goodfellow 1994 Phased Archaeological Mitigation Program, Kealakehe Planned ('ommunity Phase II: Archaeological Data Recovery, I and of Kealakehe, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 120 1-040794. Prepared for Housing Finance and Development Corporation, Depai uncut of Budget and Finance, State of I lawai i. Rechtman, R. B. and L D. Iicim 1998 Archaeological Inventory Survey Morrison Property ('rMK: 3-7-1 08:17), Kaloko Ahupua'a, North Kona District, island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 1911-111198. Prepared for Cail MotTison, 10737 NB 20" Strect Bellevue, WA 98006 Rechtman R. 13., J. D. llemy, and T. R. Wolforth 1999 Inventory of Ho omalu on Alii Subdivision, Kaumaumalu and Pahoehoc 1st Ahupua`o, North Kona Disnict.lsland of Hawaii. PHRI Report 1881. Prepared for Nohona Partners, Inc., Hilo. Reinecke, J. F. n.d. Survey of Hawaiian Sites, 1029-1930, Manuscript. Department of Anthropology, It R Bishop Nlaseum, Hnnohdu_ Sato, II., W Ikeda, 1, Pacth, R. timvthc, and M. fakehiro, Jr. 1973 Soil Saivev of Lclmtrl of F1111vaii, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Couseivation Service and I Jniversiry ofHewaii Agriculmnil Experiment Station. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. SchIIt, R. 1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kota, Ilawaii. An Archaeological Stick or Kuakini Highway Realignment Comdor. DeprnTntent,tl Repurt Series 84-1. Department ofAnthropolo,gy, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for the I hpartmcnt of Transportation, State of I-lawan, RC -0017 Sekido, L. 1968 Archaeological Excavation of a Shelter Cave: Kealakehe DI I -IA. Manuscript. Department ofAnthropology, University of Hawaii -Hilo. Shapiro, W. A., J. D. Mayberry, and A. E. flaun 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey and Limited Subsurface Testing, Waikane Golf Course Project Area, Land of Waikane, Koolaupoko District, Island of Oahu. PHRI Report 398-042188. Prepared for Group 70. State Historic Preservation Office. Smote, A. 1975 Report on the Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of the Honokohau Small Boat Harbor Expansion Area, Kealakehe, Kona, Hawaii Island. Manuscript 042875. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. 1977 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Portions of Kealakehe, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. Manuscript 122177. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for R.M. Towill. Soehren, L.J. 1975 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of a Portion of Honokohau B, North Kona, Hawaii (TMK:7-4- 08: Portion of Parcel 26). Prepared for K.M. Young and Associates. Soehren, L. J., and T .S. Newman 1968 Archaeology of Kealakekua Bay. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, and University of Hawaii-Manoa. Stokes, J. F. G. 1919 Survey of Heiaus of Hawaii. Manuscript. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Walker, A. T., and A. E. Haun 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Proposed Kealakehe Reservoir Site. PHRI Report 350-093087. Prepared for County of Hawaii, Department of Water Supply. Wilkes, C. 1845 Narrative ofthe United States Exploring Expedition During the Years 1838-1842, Under the Command of C Wilkes, U.S.N., Volume 4. Philadelphia: Loa and Blanchard. 25 09/23/2003 09:47 FAX 961 3357 DEP'/ WATER SUPPLY M6 0002 DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY - COUNTY OF HAWAII 345 KEKUANAOA STREET, SURE 20 • HILO, HAWAII 96720 TFL15PHONE(808) 961-8050 • F" (808)961-8657 March 27, 2003 TO: Mr. Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Planning Department FROM: Milton D. Pavao, Manager SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-003) APPLICANT — JAMES B. DUSEL REQUEST: AGRICULTURAL (A-20) TO AGRICULTURAL. (A -10A) AND FAMILY AGRICULTURAL (FA -3A) TAX MAP KEY 7-4-003:007 We have revi ,wed the subject application for the proposed change of zone and have the following comments. The applicarr has two existing service laterals to accommodate thvo 5/8 -inch meters with the Department Lnder an Elevation Agreement as the parcel is outside of the Department's service limits. For the applicant's information, should the subject change of zone be approved and a 2 -lot subdivision application e::ecuted, final approval will be subject to the following requirements: 1. Construct necessary water system improvements, which shall include, but not be limited to: a, water mains capable of delivering water at adequate pressure and volume under peak -flow condi ions, and each lot must front the waterline; minimum diameter of mains shall be 6 inches, b. minin Turn 100,000 -gallon reservoir with booster pumps, and c. servic - laterals that will accommodate an appropriately sized meter to each lot. Submit it stallation plans prepared by a professional engineer, architect, or land surveyor, registerec in the State of Hawaii, for review and approval. 2. Execute r ew Elevation Agreements for each proposed lot. 3. Submit tt e appropriate documents, properly prepared and executed, to convey the water system improvements and necessary easements to the Water Board of the County of Hawaii prior to final subdivision approval being granted. A registered land surveyor shall stamp and certify the metes ... Al ter 6ri)2g6 progreii... EX"18I T a 03/28/2003 09:47 FAX 961 8657 DEPT K_i+,4R SUPPLY 4-0 Z(103 Mr. Christop] er I Yuen, Planning Director Page 2 March 27, 20 )3 and botm, is description, within in the conveyance documents. However, prior to water meter services t eing granted to the development, or any lots within, the conveyance documents shall be accepted)y the Water Board. 4. Comply i rith all other applicable policies and requirements of the Department's Rules and Regulatie-is. Noncompliance may be cause for voiding this water commitment, at which time availabili y will be subject to change in accordance with the prevailing coater system conditions, policies, i ud Rules and Regulations. Should there :�e any questions, please call our Water Resources and Planning Branch at 961-8070. Sincerely yours, 'a-- ilton D. Pavao, P.E. Manager SHK:dms copy - Mr. S .dney M. Fuke Mr. I Ines B. Dusel