The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutCOM 0455.000 2002-2004Harry Kim Mayor COUNTY OF HAWAII 25 Aupuni Street, Room 215 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 • (808) 961-8211 • Fax (808) 961-6553 KONA: 75-5706 Kuakmi Highway, Suite 103 • Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 (808) 329-5226 • Fax (808) 326-5663 December 30, 2003 Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Dixie Kaetsu Managing Director Peter L. Hendricks Deputy Managing Director County of Hawaii 25 Aupuni Street ti Hilo, HI 96720 OC) CQ s Z, Z �, Dear Chairman Arakaki and Members: cD Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) 3 Applicant: Lehua Lam, LLC ry Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 and 72 State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 03-010) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-024) Request: A -la to CV -10 Applicant: Verizon Hawaii, Inc. Tax Map Key: 7-4-8:20 State Land Use Boundary Amendment Application (SLU 03-011) Request: Agricultural to Urban Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-026) Request: A -5a to RS -15 Applicant: Uluwehi Properties, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-17:21 Change of Zone Application (REZ 02-016) Applicant: Thomas A. Tuso Request: Agricultural (A -5a) to Family Agricultural (FA -3a) Tax Map Key: 7-5-12:38 As required by Chapter 4, Sec. 6-4.3(C), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Planning Commission's letters and enclosures regarding the above -referenced requests. ncerely, Harry Kim Mayor btll ZC Enclosures cc: Planning Department Comm. NO. �— Ref. To: 1� L Ref. Date Harry Kim Mayor DeCHnber 30, 2003 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 03-025) Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC Request: A -5a to RS -7.5 Tax Man Key: 7-5-20:71 and 72 The Planning Commission, after a duly held public hearing on December 4, 2003, voted to recommend for your approval the proposed legislative bill to change the district classification for approximately 10.1 acres of land from the Agricultural 5 -acre (A -5a) to a Single Family Residential — 7,500 square foot (RS -7.5) zoned district. The property is located along the east (mauka) side of Alii Drive, between the Alii Lani Condominium and the Alii Garden Marketplace and across from the Kona By The Sea and Kona Riviera Villas condominium complexes, Puapuaa 2Id, 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 -5a) zoned district to a Single Family Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district to develop a 58 -unit single family Planned Unit Development (PUD) for approximately 10.1 acres of land. The applicant intends to construct 58 single-family residential dwellings on lots ranging from 4,000 to 6,000+ square feet, and about a %z acre open space/archaeological preserve park adjacent to the planned Alii Parkway. 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 growth determined by the General Plan and 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 -5a) to a Single Family Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district will conform to, among others, the Land Use (Single Family Residential) and Housing elements of the General Plan. 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 reflects a graphic depiction of the physical relationship among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non -urban form for areas within the County. The subject area is designated Medium Density Urban and Urban Expansion Area. The Medium Density Urban designation may allow "Village and neighborhood commercial and residential (up to 35 units per acre) and related functions." Urban Expansion Area allows for a mix of high density, low density, industrial and/or open designations in areas where new settlements may be desirable, but where specific settlement pattern and mix of uses have not yet been determined. Within areas designated for development as resorts, portions of the resort area may be included in the urban expansion area. The proposed residential development would be consistent with these General Plan land use designations. The parcel to the north is zoned RM -2 and is developed with the Alii Lam condominium. The parcel to the south is zoned A -5a and contains the Alii Garden Marketplace. Alii Drive is located immediately to the west (makai) of the subject parcel. Parcels on the makai side of Alii Drive are zoned RM -1.5 and are developed with the Kona Riviera Villa and Kona by the Sea condominium projects. The proposed Alii Parkway forms the upper boundary of the subject site. Mauka of the proposed Alii Parkway, the area is zoned RS -10 and is developed with the Kahakai Estates single-family residential project. Therefore, a favorable recommendation of this change of zone request will be consistent with the emerging land use pattern being established within this portion of North Kona. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 3 To allow the 4,000 to 6,000 -square foot sized lots and lesser setbacks within the RS -7.5 zoned district, the applicant intends to apply for a PUD permit after the change of zone is approved. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) is intended to encourage comprehensive site planning that adapts the design of the development to the land, by allowing diversification in the relationships of various uses, buildings, structures, open spaces and yards, building heights, and lot sizes in planned building groups, while still insuring that the intent of the Zoning Code is observed. The minimum land area required for a PUD is two acres. The property is currently not used for any agricultural activities. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates the property as Zone "X", an area determined to be outside of the 500 -year flood plain. The property slopes from its eastern to its southern boundary at a grade between two and four percent. The elevation of the site varies from approximately 40 feet at the southeastern corner to less than 20 feet along the Alii Drive frontage. The property is unclassified by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) System. Soils within the property and surrounding area are classified as "E" or "Very Poor" for agricultural productivity by the Land Study Bureau. While the potential for intensive and/or extensive agricultural uses may exist, the soil conditions within the property and surrounding area would preclude such intensive agricultural activities from being conducted. The access to the project site will be from Alii Drive. According to the Department of Public Works (DPW), Alii Drive fronting the property is a two-lane County road with 20 -foot -wide pavement in good condition, with 6 -foot -wide paved shoulders, all within an approximately 50 -foot -wide right-of-way. According to the General Plan, Alii Drive shall be improved to a 60 -foot wide right-of-way. As such, the DPW requires the applicant to provide for the future road widening by dedicating one- half of the difference between the existing width of Alii Drive and 60 feet to the County as a condition of final subdivision approval, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The DPW, in the interests of pedestrian and bicyclist safety, requires the applicant to provide a paved shoulder extending to the right-of-way property line. The DPW may require pavement transitions, signs and markings, drainage improvements, and relocation of utilities. The DPW also requires the applicant to locate utility meter and pressure reducing valve vaults out of the right-of-way. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 4 The DPW requires that the applicant's access to Alii Drive provide adequate sight distances, be limited to one approach, and be located to avoid turning conflicts with existing developments, all of which must meet with the approval of DPW. The DPW requires that the applicant provide a minimum of 45 feet of storage and turnaround on the Alii Drive side of any gated vehicle access. All driveway connections shall conform to Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, of the Hawaii County Code. The eastern boundary of the subject parcel is or will be the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Ali`i Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way. When this report was prepared, acquisition of the right-of-way had not been completed. The DPW requires that the subject property owner shall be required to provide any additional right-of-way, at no cost to the County, as established by and upon completion of the final right-of-way maps by DPW's consultant. The DPW requires that vehicular access to the individual lots shall not be from any major collector or arterial roadways. An emergency vehicular egress, with a breakaway gate, may be provided to Alii Highway, meeting with the approval of DPW. To serve the subject property and intermediate properties, the DPW requires that the applicant extend the existing two-way left turn lane improvements along the Alii Drive frontage of the subject property. The two-way left tum land improvements shall consist of, but not limited to, pavement widening, drainage improvements, street lights, signs and markings and any relocation of utilities, which must all meet with the approval of the DPW. The DPW also requires the applicant to construct and dedicate all improvements at no cost to the County. The DPW requires that all roadways within the proposed development follow the guidelines incorporated in the Hawaii Statewide Uniform Design Manual for Streets and Highways. The DPW requires that these roadways also meet the requirements of DPW. The DPW requires concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, in areas of pedestrian traffic. The site is serviced by County water and wastewater systems. Electrical, telephone and cable services are available to the site. Police are located within 3 miles, and fire facilities are located within 5 miles. Kona Hospital is about 7 miles from the property. The Civil Defense Agency has stated that the proposed site is beyond the acceptable range of the nearest Emergency Warning Siren, and recommends that the developer purchase and install an approved Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 5 The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, relating to Coastal Zone Management Area. The property is situated within the Special Management Area. It is located approximately 300 feet from the coastline and therefore, will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. There are no identified recreational resources, public access to the shoreline or mountain areas, scenic and open space preserves, coastal ecosystems, marine resources or other natural and environmental resources in the project area. Thus, the proposed request and use of the property will not adversely impact those resources. Vegetation on the site consists primarily of introduced exotics. The site and much of the surrounding areas have or are being developed with structures, and it is not anticipated that endangered or threatened candidate species of flora or fauna are located within the subject property. The project area has not been identified as containing any significant botanical or biological habitat. An archaeological inventory survey of the subject site was performed by Paul H. Rosendahl, Inc., (PHRI), and a report was prepared in July 2003 which indicated the following: "During the survey 14 sites and 36 component features were identified. These included wall, enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well features. These features are prevalent in both the North Kona District and the island of Hawaii. The functions of these features were largely for habitation, agriculture, possible boundary, and burial. Of the 9 recorded terraces, 3 were thought to be paepae or sleeping houses, while the remaining were thought to be agricultural in nature. Of the 7 enclosures, 4 were thought to be related to animal/agricultural use, while the remaining appeared to be associated with habitation. There were 5 platforms identified, and all appeared to be of the late prehistoric or contact -era age. When tested, 2 of the features (features D & E at Site 16116) confirmed the presence of human remains. The others did not. Five mounds were identified, and these appeared to be agricultural in function, consistent with the Kona Field System. The 2 concrete features appeared to be of recent vintage and for animal husbandry. The 4 walls, the 2 modified outcrops, and the single C -shape appear to also have agricultural function. The C -shape appeared to provide shelter associated with the agricultural activity. There was one well found of the site. This well had a concrete and basal `apron' around it, a windmill tower, and an engine shed. It thus appeared to be of recent vintage. Relative to the sites on the subject property, the survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation `as is,' with possible landscaping. If they have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. The applicant intends to preserve this site and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. In that event, a Burial Treatment Plan for this site will be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The plan will essentially call for the establishment of a Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 6 landscaped buffer surrounding the site." The applicant believes that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts of the project will not be significant. The applicant noted that should there be any inadvertent finds during construction of the project, work will be stopped until clearance from the Planning Department has been secured. The archaeological inventory survey prepared by PURI was originally conducted in 1991 and was updated in July 2003. To date, there is no record that the archaeological inventory survey had been submitted to the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) for acceptance and/or that the DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan. In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai O Ka'Aina " decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. These rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. Investigation of valued resources: The applicant presented the following information from which the Planning Commission can determine the valued cultural, historical, and natural area within the sought for the rezoning: archeological reconnaissance survey, including a historical survey of documentary records; botanical study; and faunal study. According to the applicant, since the subject site is not adjacent and/or nearby to the shoreline, and since there are no known identified trails going through the site, fishing and/or coastal access should not be an issue. According to the applicant, vegetation in this area consists primarily of introduced exotics. These include kiawe (Prosopis pallida), `opiuma (Pithecellobium dulce), African tulip (spathodea campanulata), koa-haole (Leucaena glauca), monkeypod (Samanea saman), lantana (Lantana camara), guinea grass (Panicum maximum), bitter yam (Discorea bulbifera), and other exotic grasses and weeds. During a field survey by the applicant's archaeological consultant, one indigenous plant, ilima (Sida fallax) was noted. The applicant stated that it would not be likely that rare or endangered plant life would be found on the site, and that since the site and much of the surrounding areas have structures or are being developed with structures, it did not appear likely that rare or endangered animal life would be found on the site. The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the area sou hght for the Rezoning: Relative to the archeological and cultural sites on the subject property, the archeological inventory survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation `as is,' with possible landscaping. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 7 Possible adverse effects or impairment of valued resources: The setting of the burials would be changed from the present condition of a relative natural setting to one where modern single family residential dwellings will be nearby. Further, the setting for the burials would be further altered by the close proximity of the future Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Ali`i Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way, which would be located mauka of the burial sites. If the burial platforms have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. Another concern would be whether access to the burial sites by descendants would be possible through the private roads of this development. Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: The applicant intends to preserve the burial sites and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. A Burial Treatment Plan for this site must be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The applicant has stated that the plan would essentially call for the establishment of a landscaped buffer surrounding the site. The applicant has stated that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts of the project will not be significant. Regarding the access to the burials on the project site by descendants, the applicant has said that descendants will be allowed unfettered access to the burial site, as will be reflected in the approved Burial Treatment Plan. There is no record that DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan, which would include the Burial Treatment Plan. Conditions of approval will be included relating to valued cultural resources to insure that impacts to these resources are minimized, and that traditional and customary Hawaiian rights to these resources are continued. Based on the above findings, the approval of the Change of Zone request from an Agricultural (A -5a) to a Residential (RS -7.5) 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. Honorable James Y. Arakaki, Chairman and Members of the County Council Page 8 We are enclosing copies of the staff Background and Planning Director's Recommendation for your information. Sincerely, Fred Galdones, Chairman Planning Commission Llehualani02PC Enclosures cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke Mr. Randall Farleigh Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Planning Department - Kona Department of Land & Natural Resources-HPD/Kona Rodney Haraga, Director/DOT-Highways, Honolulu 1zhual. iCOZSMAAm-11/17/03 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT LEHUA LANI, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-025) SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT (SMA 03-015) LEHUA LANI, LLC has submitted an application for a Change of Zone for 10.1 acres from an Agricultural 5 -acre (A -5a) to a Single Family Residential - 7,500 square foot (RS -7.5) District and a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit to allow the development of a 58 - unit single family residential house and lot subdivision and related improvements. The property is located along the east (mauka) side of Alii Drive, between the Alii Lani Condominium and the Alii Garden Marketplace and across from the Kona By the Sea and Kona Riviera Villas condominium complexes, Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii, TMK: 7-5-20:71 and 72. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT Request: The applicant is requesting the change of zone and the Special Management Area Use Permit to allow a 58 -unit single family residential house and lot development through the Planned Unit Development (PUD) process. The proposed development includes: • Single-family housing: 58 single-family residential homes on lots ranging in size from 4,000 to 6,000+ square feet. The applicant is proposing four basic home designs, varying between one and two stories in height. None of the structures are planned to exceed the maximum height limit of 35 feet. Some of the structures will be set back less than the required 15 feet from the front and rear property lines and 8 feet along the sides. Since the lots are proposed to be less than 7,500 square feet and the setbacks less than the minimum requirements for the RS -7.5 district, the applicant intends to submit a PUD application after the Change of Zone application has been approved. • A'/nacre open space/archaeological preserve park site is proposed adjacent to the planned Ali'i Parkway. This site would serve as an archaeological preserve, and a 45 9� hC passive recreation area. The site would be a landscaped visual and noise buffer from the planned Ali'i Parkway. • Landscaped features, with an emphasis on native plants, will be incorporated at the entrance to the project, the open space/archaeological/buffer area, as well as within the road rights-of-way. • A private loop road with grass swales within the road rights-of-way will be constructed. The primary road would have a right-of-way of approximately 36 feet, with a 20 -foot -wide pavement. The rear access lanes would have a right-of-way of 24 feet with an 18 foot -wide pavement. In addition to the grassed swales, the applicant proposes trees and flowering landscaping in the balance of the road rights-of-way. All of the roads and improvements are to be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. None of the proposed improvements are intended for dedication to the County. Project construction is expected to commence in June 2004, with a two-year build -out period. The applicant hopes to begin construction next year, upon issuance of all required permits. Estimated cost for the development is $15 million. (See Exhibit A - Special Management Area Use Permit and Change of Zone applications) STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 2. State Land Use Designation: Urban. GP Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map: Medium Density Urban and Urban Expansion Area. 4. Kona Regional Plan: Residential (Res -10). 5. County Zoning: Agricultural 5 -acres (A -5a). 6. Planned Unit Development (PUD): The applicant intends to apply for a PUD permit separately. The PUD is intended to encourage comprehensive site planning that adapts the design of the development to the land, by allowing diversification in the relationships of various uses, buildings, structures, open spaces and yards, building heights, and lot sizes in planned building groups, while still insuring that the intent of the Zoning Code is observed. The minimum land area required for a PUD is two acres. (See Exhibit B - 591 Section 25-6-1, Planned Unit Development (PUD) Section of Zoning Code) Coastal Zone Management, HRS, Chapter 205A: The entire State of Hawaii lies within the Coastal Zone Management area. 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, historic resources, public access to the shoreline, scenic and open space resources, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, economic uses, coastal hazards, managing development, public participation, and beach protection. 8. Special Management Area: The project site is located in the County's Special Management Area (SMA), approximately 300 - 1,000 feet from the shoreline. The SMA is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program regulated by the County. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 9. Subject Property: The project site is located approximately one mile south of Lunapule Road, and '/z mile north of Royal Poinciana Drive, on the southwestern slope of Hualalai. The subject property is located on the mauka side of Ali'i Drive, approximately 300 to 1,000 feet from the ocean, and consists of two parcels (TMK 7-5-20: 71 & 72) with a combined area of 10.142 acres. The site is generally rectangular in shape with a frontage of 6,456 feet and a depth of 7,406 feet. The subject property is vacant of any structures and improvements and has been used in the past for cattle grazing. 10. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: The parcel to the north is zoned RM -2 and is developed with the Ali'i Lani condominium. The parcel to the south is zoned A -5a and contains the Alii Garden Marketplace. AIN Drive is located immediately to the west (makai) of the subject parcel. Parcels on the makai side of Alii Drive are zoned RM -1.5 and are developed with the Kona Riviera Villa and Kona by the Sea condominium projects. The proposed Ali'i Parkway forms the upper boundary of the subject site. Mauka of the proposed Ali'i Parkway, the area is zoned RS -10 and is developed with the Kahakai Estates single-family residential project. The Kahakai Elementary School is situated approximately 500 feet southeast of the subject site. 11. Elevation and Slope: The general slope of the site ranges from 2% to 4% and slopes -3- down towards the west or makai direction. The elevation of the site varies from approximately 40 feet at the southeastern comer to less than 20 feet along the Ali'i Drive frontage. 12. U.S.D.A. Soil Type: Punalu'u and Waiaha Soil Series. The soils are characterized by well -drained, thin organic soils overlying pahoehoe lava bedrock. The surface layer is very brown muck, about 8 inches thick, and is underlain by pahoehoe lava bedrock. Although the organic soil is rapidly permeable, runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is slight. 13. Land Study Bureau's Productivity Rating: "E" or "Very Poor". 14. ALISH: Unclassified. 15. Flora/Fauna: Vegetation in this area consists primarily of introduced exotics. These include kiawe (Prosopis pallida), `opiuma (Pithecellobium dulce), African tulip (spathodea campanulata), koa-haole (Leucaena glauca), monkeypod (Samanea saman), lantana (Lantana camara), guinea grass (Panicum maximum), bitter yam (Discorea bulbifera), and other exotic grasses and weeds. During a field survey by the applicant's archaeological consultant, one indigenous plant, ilima (Sida fallax) was noted. The applicant states that it would not be likely that rare or endangered plant life would be found on the site. The applicant also states that since the site and much of the surrounding areas have structures or are being developed with structures, it did not appear likely that rare or endangered animal life would be found on the site. 16. Marine Environment: The site is not a coastal property, and is upland of the coast. According to the applicant, there is a concern for potential runoff and sedimentation associated with the construction and operation of the project. The construction of buildings, roads, and other impermeable surfaces could have a potential long-term impact upon increasing runoff and sedimentation flowing into the marine environment. According to the applicant, in order to address the runoff problems, storm water will not be directed into ocean, but will be directed into drywells that will be designed to accommodate the storm water flow. The applicant plans to direct excess water to the landscaped areas where the ground is more permeable and is able to absorb the additional -4- water. The applicant will also comply with the erosion and dust control requirements of the County Grading Ordinance during construction, and has concluded that with these measures, there should be little, if any, potential adverse impact to the marine environment. 17. Noise Impacts: According to the applicant, the existing noise environment consists of ambient noise resulting primarily from traffic and incidental human activities, wind and foliage, surf, birds, and intermittent flybys of helicopters and aircraft. In the short-term, the project will generate construction traffic and construction equipment noise. The applicant intends to comply with State of Hawaii noise regulations. Other mitigation measures include limiting construction activities to certain periods of the day, requiring all construction equipment to have approved exhaust and muffler systems, and adhering to the State Department of Health blasting requirements. In the long-term, the noise impacts will be associated with additional traffic, and noise from the project itself. According to the applicant, because of the residential nature of the project, it is not anticipated that the noise level will increase appreciably. 18. Air Quality: According to the applicant, the project will not generate any direct long- term air quality impacts. The applicant states that the only discernible long-term impact would be associated with vehicular traffic to and from the site, and that the impact should not be significant with the anticipated low volume of traffic. The applicant states that during the short-term, construction dust could affect the area's air quality, and indicated that dust control measures would include watering, covering of open -bed trucks, taking wind patterns into consideration during earthwork, and initiating landscaping early. 19. FIRM: Zone "X", an area outside of the 500 -year flood plain. 20. Coastal Hazards: The lower portion of the subject property is located approximately 300 feet from the shoreline, and falls within the Civil Defense Tsunami Evacuation zone. The subject parcel is not an oceanfront parcel, and thus will not affect or be affected by shoreline processes. The US Geological Survey (USGS) classifies this area — which includes Kailua-Kona — as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 4, on a scale of ascending risk 9 to 1. By way of reference, the City of Hilo is located within Zone 3, while the lower Puna area -5- ranges between 1 and 2. The Building Code designates the entire island of Hawaii in Earthquake Zone 4, and contains certain structural requirements to address the relative seismic hazards. 21. Recreational Resources: The proposed development will not reduce the size of the coastline or other areas used for public recreational uses. 22. Visual Resources: Looking makai towards the ocean from Kuakini Highway, the subject site is visible and will have some visual impact. However, there are already structures that are located makai of the subject site that obscure views of the coastline. According to the applicant, the proposed development with all of its structures no higher than 35 feet tall, will not result in further diminution of the coastal view from the highway. This is because the distance of the site from the highway (over 1,000 feet), the less dominating single-family structures, and the landscaping work favorably together to reduce the visual impact of the project from Kuakini Highway. The applicant notes that given the project's extensive landscaping, the visual impact to the surrounding areas will not be significant, since the subject site is bounded by multi -family residential developments to the north and west, and single-family residences to the east. 23. Archaeological/Historical/Cultural Resources: An archaeological inventory survey of the subject site was performed by Paul H. Rosendahl, Inc., (PHRI), and a report was prepared in July, 2003 which indicated the following: "During the survey 14 sites and 36 component features were identified. These included wall, enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well features. These features are prevalent in both the North Kona District and the island of Hawaii. The functions of these features were largely for habitation, agriculture, possible boundary, and burial. Of the 9 recorded terraces, 3 were thought to be paepae or sleeping houses, while the remaining were thought to be agricultural in nature. Of the 7 enclosures, 4 were thought to be related to animal/agricultural use, while the remaining appeared to be associated with habitation. There were 5 platforms identified, and all appeared to be of the late prehistoric or contact -era age. When tested, 2 of the features (features D & E at Site 16116) confirmed the presence of human remains. The others did not. Five mounds 0 were identified, and these appeared to be agricultural in function, consistent with the Kona Field System. The 2 concrete features appeared to be of recent vintage and for animal husbandry. The 4 walls, the 2 modified outcrops, and the single C-shape appear to also have agricultural function. The C-shape appeared to provide shelter associated with the agricultural activity. There was one well found of the site. This well had a concrete and basal `apron' around it, a windmill tower, and an engine shed. It thus appeared to be of recent vintage. Relative to the sites on the subject property, the survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation `as is,' with possible landscaping. If they have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. The applicant intends to preserve this site and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. In that event, a Burial Treatment Plan for this site will be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The plan will essentially call for the establishment of a landscaped buffer surrounding the site." The applicant believes that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts of the project will not be significant. The applicant noted that should there he any inadvertent finds during construction of the project, work will be stopped until clearance from the Planning Department has been secured. The archaeological inventory survey prepared by PHRI was originally conducted in 1991 and was updated in July, 2003. To date, there is no record that the archaeological inventory survey had been submitted to the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) for acceptance and/or that the DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan. 24. Valued Cultural Resources: In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai O Ka Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. These rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. According to the applicant, since the subject site is not -7- adjacent to and/or near the shoreline, and there are no known identified trails going through the site, fishing and/or coastal access should not be an issue. Regarding the burials on the project site, the applicant has stated that descendants will be allowed unfettered access to the burial site, as will be reflected in the approved Burial Treatment Plan. There is no record that DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan, which would include the Burial Treatment Plan. 25. Traffic: A Traffic Impact Analysis Report (TIAR) for this project was prepared by Witcher Engineering LLP in August, 2003. The study evaluated the traffic impact of this project relative to Ali'i Drive, Royal Poinciana Drive, and Lunapule Road. The study calculated the levels of service (LOS) at various intersections to determine levels of impact resulting from the project. LOS is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for individual approaches and the intersection as a whole, with a range from "A" to "F." A LOS "A" would be ideal, with average delays of less than 5 seconds, while LOS "F" would be the worst, with average delays of 60 or more seconds, and requiring mitigating measures. Based on this LOS approach, the study made the following findings and conclusions: Relative to the project's intersection, the AM and PM level of service (LOS) would be "C," with or without a left -turn lane at Ali'i Drive. In the case of Lunapule Road, the existing and projected (with the project) AM or morning (6:30 am. to 9:00 a.m.) LOS for westbound traffic is "C, " and is `B" for the PM or afternoon (3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.). During the same period, the AM LOS at Royal Poinciana Drive is "C," and is "D" for the PM traffic. The LOS for southbound movements at both the Lunapule Road and Royal Poinciana Drive intersections was "A." According to the TZAR, the levels of service at the Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Drive intersection and the Ali'i Drive and Lunapule Road intersection will not be significantly impacted by this development. The TIAR states that the Lunapule Road intersection has been impacted seriously by several developments, but that these developments had little impact on the intersection of Royal Poinciana and AIN Drive. The report concluded that a left tum lane from AIN Drive to the project site was not needed "since the level of service and approach delay remain the same." tf11 According to the Department of Public Works: Ali'i Drive traffic in the southbound lane will experience some delay when left turns are made to the project during peak hours. Additional delays can be expected when pedestrian traffic and vehicle traffic share the road. No increase in traffic volumes on Ali'i Drive over the build -out period was accounted for in the report, and that if the existing tum lane is extended, it will serve intermediate properties as well. The Department of Public Works recommends that the existing two-way left tum lane fronting the adjacent property to the north be extended to serve the entry to the subject property. The Police Department, consistent with its recommendations for all new requests along Alii Drive for multi -unit subdivisions, is requesting left -turn storage lanes. 26. Public Access: The subject site is not adjacent to or near the shoreline, and thus no public accesses to the shoreline will be affected. Further, according to the applicant, since there are no known identified trails going through the site, fishing and/or coastal access would not be an issue. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 27. Access: The proposed access to the project site is from Ali'i Drive. According to the Department of Public Works (DPW), Ali'i Drive fronting the property is a two-lane County road with 20 -foot -wide pavement in good condition, and 6 -foot -wide paved shoulders, all within an approximately 50 -foot wide right-of-way. According to the General Plan, Alii Drive shall be improved to a 60 -foot wide right-of-way. As such, the DPW requires the applicant to: provide for the future road widening by dedicating one-half of the difference between the existing width of Alii Drive and 60 feet to the County as a condition of final subdivision approval, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy; provide a paved shoulder extending to the right-of-way property line. Pavement transitions, signs and markings, drainage improvements, and relocation of utilities may be required as necessary; 1n • locate utility meter and pressure reducing valve vaults out of the right-of-way; • provide adequate sight distances for access onto Alii Drive, be limited to one approach, and be located to avoid turning conflicts with existing developments, all of which must meet with the approval of DPW; • provide a minimum of 45 feet of storage and turnaround on the Alii Drive side of any gated vehicle access; provide any additional right-of-way, at no cost to the County, as established by and upon completion of the final right-of-way maps by DPW's consultant. The eastern boundary of the subject parcel is or will be the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Ali'i Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way. When this report was prepared, acquisition of the right-of-way had not been completed. • restrict vehicular access to the individual lots from any major collector or arterial roadways. An emergency vehicular egress, with a breakaway gate, may be provided to AIN Highway, meeting with the approval of the DPW. extend the existing two-way left tum lane improvements along the Alli Drive frontage of the subject property; the two-way left tum land improvements shall consist of, but not limited to, pavement widening, drainage improvements, street lights, signs and markings and any relocation of utilities, meeting with the approval of the DPW construct concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks in the areas of pedestrian traffic, and dedicate all improvements at no cost to the County. The Kona Traffic Safety Committee (KTSC) expressed concerns regarding the project's density, pedestrian safety, traffic impact on Ali'i Drive and Mauka-Makai Traffic, emergency and service vehicle access, and school transportation. The KTSC: • suggested that the developer designate jogging/walking paths separate from parking and vehicular traffic lanes and recommended, for safety reasons, that a left -tum lane from AIN Drive into the project be required; • expressed concerns that the 18 -foot pavement for the rear access lanes will not be adequate to handle large emergency and service vehicles, such as fire trucks, -10- ambulances, and garbage trucks, and urged that the rear access lanes have 20 -foot pavements; • requested that the applicant fund installation of a direct pedestrian link between the project and Kahakai Elementary School, and a button -activated cross -walk light on Alii Drive for intermediate and high school students using the bus. Civil Defense noted that any additional development along Ali'i Drive without a corresponding "Mauka-Makai" access route will have an adverse effect on traffic in the event of an emergency evacuation for the tsunami evacuation zone. 28. Water: The site is presently served by the County water system. There is a water line along AIN Drive, which will be extended into the subject site. According to the applicant, the anticipated water commitment for this project should not exceed 58 units. 29. Wastewater: The County has an 8 -inch sewer line along AIN Drive. The applicant intends to discharge the project's wastewater into this system. The State Department of Health, in noting that the project was within or in near proximity to the County sewer system, supported the sewer requirements made by the County. 30. Solid Waste: Solid waste generated by the proposed project will be collected by private refuse collection companies and transported to the County's Puuanahulu Landfill. 31. Drainage: The DPW requires that all development -generated runoff be disposed of on- site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent property. The applicant, in the use of drywells in the subject development, may be required to obtain an Underground Injection Control (UIC) permit from the State of Hawaii Department of Health. The State Department of Health stated that the applicant should contact the Army Corps of Engineers to determine whether a Federal license or permit (including a Department of Army Permit) is required for this project. The DPW requires that a drainage study shall be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit, and that the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the DPW. Although the property is not located in a designated special Flood Hazard Area on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the applicant is advised of existing drainage reports on file with DPW for the area. The DPW requires that the applicant identify and address offsite flows through the -11- subject property as required by the Subdivision code and the Storm Drainage Standard in a manner meeting with the approval of the DPW. The study shall address the proposed culverts on the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Alii Highway) Phase 1 plans, the existing drainage easement on the subject property and a concrete box culvert in AIN Drive fronting the subject property. 32. Essential Utilities and Services: Electricity and telephone services are available to the site. Police protective services are available from the Kealakehe Police Station located about three miles of the project site, and from Captain Cook in South Kona. Within 5 miles from the site, there are three fire stations, at Kailua-Kona, Kealakehe, and Pu'uloa. There is another fire station at Captain Cook. Emergency medical and paramedical services are also provided from these fire stations. The Kona Hospital is located in Kealakekua approximately seven miles from the site. The County Civil Defense Agency stated that the proposed site is beyond the acceptable range of the nearest Emergency Warning Siren, and recommended that the developer purchase and install an approved Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren. 33. Affordable Housing: The County Office of Housing and Community Development, stated that the housing conditions, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawaii County Code, relating to Affordable Housing Policy, are applicable to the residential portions of the project. 34. Schools: Kealakehe Elementary, Intermediate, and High School are located in Kealakehe. The property is located in close proximity to Kahakai Elementary School. The State Department of Education (DOE) requests that the fair share school contribution be included as a condition of approval. The DOE also requests that "...special efforts be made to coordinate construction activity with the principal of Kahakai Elementary School so that construction -related dust and noise could be minimized during school hours." 35. Parks: The Old Kona Airport State Park is located approximately four miles north of the project site. Other State Parks in the area include the Kealakekua Bay Historic Park and Kekaha Kai State Park. County parks in the region include Disappearing (White) Sands Beach Park, Hookena Beach Park and Kahaluu Beach Park. The Department of Parks -12- and Recreation (P&R): states that the South Kona District is currently under -served by existing active public recreational facilities and amenities, and that any increase in available dwelling units without a corresponding increase in active recreational amenities should be considered an adverse impact; states that the proposal to set aside common areas for a passive park site and for conservation of a burial site will be valuable assets to the residents of the subdivision. However, P&R feels that the passive park sites will not be sufficient to service the active recreational needs of the residents of the proposed subdivision who will be forced to seek active recreation opportunities primarily at nearby public facilities; • requested that the Fair Share Contribution be assessed in conjunction with the proposed actions, and that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the proposed passive park sites be preserved and cared for in perpetuity by the applicant. The department had no interest in assuming any responsibility, at any capacity, for the subject "park" sites. AGENCIES' AND ORGANIZATIONS' COMMENTS 36. Department of Public Works: (See Exhibit C - October 28, 2003 Memo) 37. Department of Environmental Management: (See Exhibit D - October 2, 2003 Memo) 38. Police Department: (See Exhibit E - October 20, 2003 Memo) 39. Fire Department: (See Exhibit F - October 15, 2003 Memo) 40. Department of Parks and Recreation: (See Exhibit G - October 22, 2003 Memo) 41. Civil Defense Agency: (See Exhibit H - October 7, 2003 Memo) 42. Office of Housing and Community Development: (See Exhibit I - October 2, 2003 Memo) 43. Department of Health: (See Exhibit J - October 20, 2003 and October 22, 2003 Memos) 44. State Department of Transportation: (See Exhibit K - October 8, 2003 Memo) -13- 45. Department of Education: (See Exhibit L - October 29, 2003 Letter) 46. Kona Traffic Safety Committee: (See Exhibit M - October 19, 2003 Letter) 47. Hawaii Electric Light Company, Inc.: (See Exhibit N - October 17, 2003 Letter) 48. Kona Soil and Water Conservation District: (See Exhibit O - October 20, 2003 Letter) 49. Department of Land and Natural Resources, Land Division: (See Exhibit T — November 14, 2003) AGENCIES - NO RESPONSE 50. Department of Water Supply and Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AGENCIES 51. (See Exhibit P - Applicant's Response Letters dated October 12, 2003, October 22, 2003, two letters dated October 31, 2003, and November 17, 2003) PETITION FOR STANDING IN CONTESTED CASE HEARING 52. Two Petitions for Standing in a Contested Case Hearing were received: 1) Robert Russell and Lillian Fox (See Exhibit Q - Petition for Standing in Contested Case Hearing received on October 13, 2003), and 2) Debra Wijet (See Exhibit R - Petition for Standing in Contested Case Hearing received on October 13, 2003). The petitions were received without notarizations and the $100 filing fees. The Planning Department informed both petitioners that their petitions were incomplete and returned the petitions without action. The Planning Department informed the petitioners that the petitions could be resubmitted if notarized and accompanied with the required filing fees. (See Exhibit S - October 16, 2003 Letters). 14- APPLICATIONS FOR SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT and COUNTY REZONING (A -5a TO RS -7.5) LEHUA LANI, LLC Puapua' a 2nd, North Kona, Hawai i TMK: (3) 7-5-20: 71 & 72 Prepared For: Lehua Lani, LLC Prepared By: Sidney M. Fuke, Planning Consultant September 2003 E X W B I T A 0 0 ' SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT , (Type or legibly print the requested informa4u) CC ' APPLICANT: L ehua L ani , LLC APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: w4uC DATE: 9 / 8 /03 ADDRESS: c/o Randall Farleigh 2140 Atwood Drive Anchorage, AK 99517 ' LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: Randall Farleigh (Manaeing ' (907) 274-9819 member) Denise Farleigh (me PHONE:(Bus.) (Res.) (Fax) (907) 277-2288 LANDOWNER(S):, LANDOWNER LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS Cama ac a REQUEST: DEvelopment of a 58 -unit single-family residential house and lot subdivision (Planned Unit Development) and ated improvemetns 72 (3) 7-5-20:71 TAX MAP KEY: ZONING: A -5a proposed fog SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S): 10.1+ Acres (441,77 SF) RS -7.5 AGENT Sidney Fuke ADDRESS: 100 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Suite 212 TELEPHONE:(Bus.) 969-1522 (Res.)_ (Fax) 969-7996 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Sidney Fuke COPIES: Randall Farleieh (See Instructions on Reverse Side) 0 0 CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT: APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: ADDRESS: c/o Randy Farleigh 2140 Atwood Drive Anchorage, AK 99517 9/8/03 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: Randy Farleigh (Managing Member) Denise Farleigh (member) PHONE:(Bus.) (907) 274-9819 (Res.) (Fax) (907) 277-2288 LANDOWNER(S): Randall and Denis F/arleigh LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): s y�l tistj.'� DATE: 9/8/03 ( ay be Ay letter) LANDOWNER(S) ADDRESS: Same as applicant REQUEST: A -5a TO RS -7.5 - TAX MAP KEY: (Existing zoning) (3) 7-5-20: 71 & 72 (Proposed Zoning) STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 7 5 Alii Drive SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 10.1+ acs (441,778 sf ) AGENT: Sidney Fuke ADDRESS: 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 - Hilo, HI 96720 TELEPHONE: (Bus.) 969-1522 (Res.) (Fax) 969-7996 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Sidney Puke COPIES: Randall Farleigh (See Instructions on Reverse Side) I I ' ATTACHMENT Residential Rezoning ' PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAII APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE 'I. If your request is approved, do you intend to subdivide the subject land in accordance with the approved change of zone? Yes If yes, please answer the rest of question 1 and then to question 3. ' a. How many acres of the requested area do you intend to subdivide? All 4,000 6,000+ b. Into what lot sizes? to sf C. If your request is approved, approximately how long ' after the date of approval do you expect to submit your subdivision plans to the Planning Department ' for preliminary approval? Immediately d. Do you intend to build houses on the newly created lots? Yes ' If yes, please answer the following questions: tOn how many of 'those lots? All At what approximate price range? House ' Lots Total Approximately how long, after approval of the subdivision, would the first house be available for occupancy? If you intend to subdivide, please submit a preliminary schematic subdivision plan together with your change of zone application form. $350,000 to $400,OOC 1 year 3 4 r 2. If you have no firm plans of subdividing the subject area, r do you intend to: a. Sell or lease the land to someone who nas firm plans? r b. Sell or lease the land to someone who has tentative plans? , C. Sell or lease the land to someone who has no plans? d. Keep it? ' e. Other (please state) f. If you intend to do either a, b, or c, please elaborate on the kind of plans the other party has. Please, also, include in your answer approximately how soon after approval of your rezoning do you expect to transfer the subject land to another party. Do you think that your request and your further plans for the land will alleviate the local housing situation? Yes How? The project would put single-family residential units on the market at an affordable range in an area customarily oriented to the multiple -family range. Are there any buildings on the subject area? No If so, what kind? What do you intend to do with those'bufrd-fngs if -your request is approved? -2- 0 0 5. Is the subject land currently being used for any agricultural activitity? If so, please list the kinds of products grown and on how many square feet or acres of land per product. 6. To your knowledge, has there been any flooding and/or drainage problem on the subject area? If so, please describe the problem. 7. Do you think that the roads leading to the subject area needs improvement? If so, what kind? Is the road adequate for the proposed traffic volume or load? a, What sort of governmental assistance and/or improvements do you feel will be needed in the subject area when developed? -3- M We Me yes No a. Schools % b. Roads % % C . Sewer % d. Drainage e. Police Protection % -3- M We Me • • , Yes No f. Fire Protection g g. Recreational Facilities g ' h. Public Utilities % i. Other % , For those checked ",yes," please elaborate what type or kinds of improvements and/or assistance are needed. Signature: C l,74� Address: 2140 Atwood Drive Anchorage, AK Telephone: ( 907 ) 274-9819 Date: 9/08/03 i -4- rM7A/50A H I 11 • 0 PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT LEHUA LANI, LLC PUAPUAA 2n°, NORTH KONA, HAWAII TMK: (3) 7-5-20: 71 & 72 ' I. GENERAL BACKGROUND i J I I I I I I t_l The applicant, Lehua Lani, LLC, is proposing to develop a 58 -unit single- family Planned Unit Development (PUD) project on 10.1+ acres (441,778 square feet) of land. The subject site, identified by TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72, is located on the mauka side or west of Ali'i Drive, approximately 1 mile south of Lunapule Road. The subject site, which is vacant of any structures, is situated within the State Land Use Urban district. It is zoned Agriculture (A -5a) by the County and located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). Given the above, before the subject project can be developed, it must be rezoned into the Single-family Residential (RS -7.5) district by the County Council and also be granted a SMA permit by the County Planning Commission. This report is intended to support these requests. II. PROJECT LOCATION As noted earlier, the subject site, consisting of 10.1+ acres, is located approximately 1 mile south of Lunapule Road and 1/2 mile north of Royal Poinciana Drive. More specifically, the Alii Garden Marketplace is situated to its immediate south, while the Alii Lani condominium is located to its north. The Kona Riviera Villa and Kona By The Sea condominium projects are located immediately makai of the subject site. (See Figures 1 & 2). There are other multiple -family residential projects and single-family residences in the general vicinity. The proposed Alii Parkway forms the upper boundary of the subject site, and the Kahakai Estates is located mauka of the proposed Parkway in this area. The Kahakai Elementary School is situated approximately 500 feet southeast of the subject site. III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION A. Project Concept The basic objective of this project is the creation of a master planned, affordable, pedestrian -friendly, socially conducive, residential • • 1 400 LU 0 J Y CL i N o C. oco \\ o to O O O d O O O O W � o Y 7 Y J 6 O O t m E m Y G Figure 1 - S 1 1 1 1 Auala! �� x� -< A Horne zV � ' Elderly `-.� ,� �'ti'" �5. a --t PF •e %uilua Piety Esi r Housing lb nHale° rr�� — z Rye—aalalai ' Bil fuh K°^ o Z ala alai a" � colony �a 1. eUn Lj thof �'� • Royal Kailuan r a K • t�'� 3 gillcreSt 1d y6 AC. Loi P • � w L�a4ilaRaotel c • Tonery Una P�+le °r0r Ori° �i1n efface - 0 1 � Sea IT40age • ' Kona Shares • Alii Ytlla • ' - Sub Kana Makai • "ect Site Ol• Kuakini . • Alii Lam Kahakai ' �' os°ao� ls`c• cry ttr �Elem 46y dy _G0� � 'rk�t Schl AliiKai • Ftp o,Fe;QO�,Q .f. o� .�p • 1t� �� YsQos • • / � �LJf � �d `?JaA � F00 L:�` -Ppr°cto Gose. t • �oF , betty - 40,r t0 1o(51 le4o�t0°moo%Wa • • $isDQ en. C d�a�O� Ry tt :\ otcV I�oLitT, J-bl. • oc. 4 �'fo t �cr p`: • Ka nana tor °`l'� 0.5 • Trees /aq �a c AI aa°�. CO Ive �°ry0& rJ • �� o Polms \�o •K �°`O \�, 4 Luther h �i •�`� �f �o� Chu*c 4 � V�l_.- C¢sa de o 78-0348 f%e 'Alohi Rai K --'al hi Kai P1 ' Fissure 2 3'� on Alii ]golorn Q • 0 community called "Lehua Lani ". This community would be designed in a manner that reflects the island's unique Hawaiian culture, as well as its natural environment. It is also intended to function and encourage a sense of community or neighborliness among its occupants. To that end, the planned community would include design statements — such as landscaped entrances and building design — that help define and distinguish this community from other developments. At the same time, homes would be spaced and aligned in a manner where social interaction would be encouraged, while preserving and taking advantage of the natural airflow and light. Furthermore, the subdivision and the homes would be designed in a manner so that greater personal interaction among neighbors would be encouraged, while maintaining a greater sense of open space. This would be accomplished through the creation of common open space and buffer areas, pedestrian -friendly streetscape, and homes that would encourage neighborly interaction. The archaeological features located on the mauka end of the site would be preserved and made a part of the project's buffer from the Parkway. The open space and pedestrian ambiance would be enhanced through buffers and rear access streets. Then, too, a related objective is to create a pedestrian -friendly project. This will be achieved in part through the streetscape and roadway system. There will be a landscaped entry, traffic calming roadway features such as loop road and rear access lanes, and a modified sidewalk system, which will also serve as a walkingfjogging area. To accomplish these goals and the goal of affordable housing, there will have to be some deviations from certain development standards. In that regard, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) permit will be applied for to achieve the necessary deviations or variances. These deviations, however, would not compromise public health and safety. Project Components As outlined in Figure 3, the Lehua Lani community would consist of the following components: 58 single-family residential homes on lots ranging between 4,000 to 6,000+ square feet. Tentatively, there would be 4 basic home 2 7 Il I L1' E /Lm�ied 9inin-1 8 eniJd !lIV c Fissure 3 s W � E 2 0 Idesigns, varying between 1 and 2 stories. None of the structures would exceed the maximum height limit of 35 feet. To achieve the desired level of design objectives, some of the structures will be I set back less than the required 15 feet from the front and rear property lines and 8 feet along the sides. ' In terms of the spatial design of the project, a majority of the homes will have a main lanai oriented toward the street or open space. This is to encourage a greater sense of community while ' enabling homeowners to monitor activities within the project area. Two -car garages will be placed at various locations on a site to avoid creation of a typical subdivision with wall to wall 2 -car ' garages at the front of the houses. Relative to the design of the homes, each home will attempt to ' reflect or capture the local character and sensitivity to the indigenous Hawaiian context. This would be achieved through the use of roof overhangs, gable and hip roofs, lanais, traditional ' window placement, and a historical precedent for form and building materials. (See Figure 4). About a 1/2 -acre open space/archaeological preserve park site wou ,e created adjacent o e planned ' not only serve as an archaeological preserve, but a passive area for recreation, social exchange and interaction. It would also serve as a landscaped visual and noise buffer from the Parkway. t• the Landscaped features, with an emphasis on native plants, at entrance to the project, the open space/buffer area, as well as ' within the road rights-of-way. • Private loop road with grassed swales within the road rights-of- way. The primary road would have a right-of-way of 36+ feet, with a 20+ -foot wide pavement. The rear access lanes would have a right-of-way of 24± feet with 18+ -feet pavement. ' In addition to the grassed swales, there will be trees and flowering landscaping within the balance of the road rights-of-way. This will help create a friendly, pedestrian -oriented streetscape, where the roads and their rights-of-way would not be limited to vehicles. They would have multiple functions, serving also as and a visual amenity. jogging/walking paths, overflow parking, IV V. W r It should be noted that all of the roads and improvements therein would be owned and maintained by the homeowners association. None of the proposed improvements is intended to be dedicated to the County. C. Project Costs and Timetable The total improvement cost of this project is projected at $15 million, less land and carrying costs. The applicant hopes to begin construction upon issuance of all required permits within the next year. The anticipated construction commencement date is June 2004, with a 2 -year build out period. PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS The subject site is zoned Agriculture (A -5a) or one unit for every 5 acres of land. Inasmuch as the proposed Lehua Lani project will have 58 units, the applicant is requesting the subject site be rezoned into the Single-family Residential (RS -7.5) or one unit for every 7,500 square feet district. At the same time, since the site falls within the County Special Management Area (SMA), a SMA Use Permit is required from the Planning Commission. As noted earlier, a Planned Unit Development (PUD) permit will also be applied for separately. The PUD permit, which is subject to the approval of the County Planning Director, is required to enable the required deviations from the minimum lot size, set back, road width and improvements, and associated requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes. Should there be favorable actions on the rezoning, SMA, and PUD applications, other ministerial permits - such as grading/grubbing, Plan Approval, Building Permit, Department of Health air quality permit, and the like - will still be required. INSTITUTIONAL CONSIDERATIONS A. State Land Use The State Land Use designation of the project site is Urban. As such, the requested zoning is consistent with this designation and no further State Land Use action would be required. B. General Plan The County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map is not intended to be specifically measurable. The site I I 1 1 0 L r_` y 0 L 1 1 1 P I [1 P 11 C. 19 E. 0 0 is generally designated Resort and Urban Expansion. A Resort Area includes "uses such as hotels, condominium -hotels (condominiums developed and/or operated as hotels), and supporting services." Urban Expansion areas "Allows for a mix of high density, low density, industrial and/or open designations in areas where new settlements may be desirable, but where the speck settlement pattern and mix of uses have not yet been determined. Within areas designated for development as resorts, portions of the resort area may be included in the urban expansion area." The proposed residential development would be consistent with those designations. As such, no General Plan amendment would be required to effectuate this project. 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. To date, the County Council has not adopted it. Notwithstanding the above, it does provide some measure of land use guidance. In that regard, the Land Use Concept map of this plan suggests that this area is suitable for a Res -10 (maximum 10 residential units per acre) use. The proposed project and zoning (RS -7.5) would result in less than 6 units per acre, making it consistent with this Draft Plan. Other Land Use Plans The subject site falls outside of the planning boundaries of the Master Plan for Kailua-Kona and the Keahole to Kailua Master Plan. County Zoning The County zoning of the subject property is Agriculture (A -5a). Most of the properties in the immediate vicinity of the subject site are zoned for multiple family residential uses. The Alii Lani condominium located to its north is zoned RM -2, while the Kona By The Sea and Kona Riviera projects located makai or west of the project site are zoned RM -1.5. The Alii Garden Marketplace to its south is zoned Agriculture -5a, while the Kahakai Estates subdivision located mauka or east of the project site and across of the proposed Ali' i Parkway are zoned R-10. The zoning map for the Kahakai Estates project, VI. 0 0 which also shows the zoning designations of other surrounding properties, is identified by Figure 5. If approved, the overall density of the site would be consistent with the requested RS -7.5 zone. Although the project will conform to the proposed density, some of the other technical requirements of the Zoning and Subdivision Codes will not be met. As noted earlier, the lots will vary between 4,000 to 6,000+ square feet, which would be less than the minimum area of 7,500 square feet. Then, too, in terms of setbacks, the minimum requirement for the requested RS -7.5 zone is 15 feet from the front and rear property lines, and 8 feet from the sides. Some of the structures, particularly the garages, will not meet the setback requirements. Nonetheless, all of the structures will conform to the required setbacks relative to Ali i Drive and all adjoining properties. The maximum allowable height is 35 feet. The proposed buildings will vary between 1 and 2 stories and will not exceed the maximum allowable height of 35 feet, inclusive of the roof, within the requested RS -7.5 zone. (See Figure 4). To achieve these design deviations from the Zoning and Subdivision Code, the applicant will be applying for a Planned Unit Development (PUD) Permit. F. Relationship to SMA Obiectives and Policies The site is located within the County Special Management Area (SMA). As such, a SMA Use Permit would be required. A discussion of this project's relationship to the SMA policies and objectives are found in Chapter IX of this report. G. Other Permits The other required permits will be of the ministerial variety. Some of these include grad inglgrubbing, Plan Approval from the Planning Director, Building Permit, water and sewer hook up, and the like. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS A. General Description The subject site is located on the southwestern slope of Hualalai. G1 v � Ext EN SIaN -KINI I MJ" Lt l N rzUE or�TM SC _ALE PJ ' I u RM -7 j RMj7 \ E— //^\KI'A\H ErLo'� p I I I RM kakuWl boy u AG121GULTURAL 0 \SIIVGI_.0 FA RESIr>ENTIAL AREA = ,OB•3J I nM_z u i R9 IS \ PJ P' rzs-lo � fG Proiect Site J mumuhalo point `- F9 AMENDMENT TO THE ZONING CODE AMENDING SCCTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP) AR-FlCLE 8, CHAPTER 2E (ZONING COC�7=� OF ' THE HAINAII COUNTY CODE, Io7 CHANGING THE.- D19TR1CT CL.A551F1CA7l0N FROM 4,0ARICULTURAL (A-so)T'O SINGLE (RS -:)0) AT P�►APUAA 1ST AND 2ND, NORTH KONA, t-iAYVf�II. PR�PAR�� C3Y _ pt-ANMNG I7t=PA�TMCNT. COUNT7 of 1-1AWAtl J11NC ?S,1sJ'.�°.J:Revised} 'TMM = 7- `-�-�0 ' PonTtorq o1= 1 JAN. 6, Q00o(RevtSCn)J(jNET`G, 1980 'Figure 5 �yCA HAr<AI A99oCIATE3� • 0 Located on the mauka side of Ali' i Drive, approximately 300+ to 1,000+ feet from the ocean, the site consists of two parcels with a combined area of 10.142 acres. The site is generally rectangular in shape with a frontage of 645+ feet and a depth of 740± feet. The subject site is vacant of any structures and improvements and has been used in the past for cattle grazing. The general slope of the site ranges from 2% to 4% and runs towards the west or makai. The elevation of the site varies from approximately 40 feet at the its southeastern corner to less than 20 feet along the Alii Drive frontage. Being on the leeward side of the island, the project site is generally sunny in the mornings with occasional afternoon clouds. The rainy season is usually during the summer, with wetter periods from November to January. The average annual rainfall is approximately 30 to 40 inches, with pan evaporation estimated at 55 inches per year. The wetter months tend to occur between March through September. The mean annual temperature is about seventy-five (75) degrees Fahrenheit, with the warmer months during the summer. Winds tend to be light and variable. Slight easterly winds occur during the day, while westerly or mountain winds are prevalent during the evenings. B. Soils and Topography The US Department of Agriculture Soil Conservation Survey Report identifies the predominate soils overlying the project site as Punalu'u and Waiaha Soil Series. These soils are characterized by well - drained, thin organic soils overlying pahoehoe lava bedrock. The surface layer is very dark brown muck about 8 inches thick. It is underlain by pahoehoe lava bedrock. Although the organic soil is rapidly permeable, runoff is medium, and the erosion hazard is slight The Land Study Bureau Overall Master Productivity Rating for the subject area is essentially Class "E° or poor (E233). This suggests the site has poor productivity potential for agricultural crops. It is of the Waiha soil series where there is shallow soil material. It is described as being rocky, well drained and unsuited for machine tillability. The State of Hawai'i's Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) maps do not have a classification of this area. 1 ' C. Natural and Coastal Hazards The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate ' Map (FIRM) Map designates this area Zone X, areas determined to be outside the 500 -year flood plain. ' It should be noted, however, that the site falls within the Civil Defense Tsunami Evacuation zone. The shoreline is about 300 feet from the ' lower portion of the subject site. The US Geological Survey (USGS) classifies the area — which includes Kailua-Kona - as Lava Flow Hazard Zone 4, on a scale of ' ascending risk 9 to 1. By way of reference, the City of Hilo is located within Zone 3, while the lower Puna area ranges between Zones 1 ' and 2. The Building Code designates the entire island of Hawaii in ' Earthquake Zone 4 and contains certain structural requirements to address the relative seismic hazards. ' D. Flora and Fauna Implications Vegetation in this area consists primarily of introduced exotics. These ' include the kiawe (Prosopis pailida), 'opiuma (Pithecellobium dulce), African tulip (Spathodea campanulata, koa-haole (Leucaena glauca), monkeypod (Samanea saman), lantana (Lantana camara), guinea ' grass (Panicum maximum), bitter yam (Dioscorea bulbifera) and other exotic grasses and weeds. During a field surrey, the archaeologist noted the presence of one indigenous plant, 'ilima (Sida fallax). Given the above, it does not appear likely that one would find rare or endangered plant life on the site. Notwithstanding this evaluation, as ' noted earlier, to the extent feasible, native landscaping and/or exotics that are typical of this area would be incorporated into the project's landscape. Likewise, as the site and much of the surrounding areas have or are developed with structures, it does not appear likely that one would find rare or endangered animal life on the site. As such, there should not be any significant or adverse impacts to the area's flora and fauna. 8 E. Archaeological Implications An archaeological inventory survey of the subject site was performed by Paul H. Rosendahal, Ph.D., Inc. (PHRI), and a report was prepared in July 2003. (Appendix A) During the survey 14 sites with 36 component features were identified. (See Figure 6) These features included wall, enclosure, C - shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well. These features are prevalent in both the North Kona District and island of Hawaii. The functions of these features were largely for habitation, agriculture, possible boundary, and burial. Of the 9 recorded terraces, 3 were thought to be paepae or sleeping houses, while the remaining were thought to be agricultural in nature. Of the 7 enclosures, 4 were thought to be related to animal/agriculture use, while the remaining appeared to be associated with habitation. There were 5 platforms identified, and all appeared to be of the late prehistoric or contact -era age. When tested, 2 of the features (features D & E at Site 16116) confirmed the presence of human remains. The others did not. Five (5) mounds were identified, and these appeared to be agricultural in function, consistent with the Kona Field System. The 2 concrete features appeared to be of recent vintage and for animal husbandry. The 4 walls, the 2 modified outcrops, and the single C -shape appear to also have agricultural function. The C -shape appeared to provide shelter associated with the agricultural activity. There was one well found on the site. This well had a concrete and basalt "apron" around it, a windmill tower, and an engine shed. It thus appeared to be of recent vintage. Relative to the sites on the subject property, the survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation "as is", with possible landscaping. If they have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. The applicant intends to preserve this site and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. vm a p W m Z¢ Z¢ O ¢ vt� Ui ~ �= U �< O FE Q __�m�maxwn��em�mrevr 3 A I d O vm W W m m 6 O ¢ vt� Ui ~ �= U �< O FE Q 0 W 7 J o � 7 '0 0 � o ¢ O Q __�m�maxwn��em�mrevr 3 A I d O 1 1 l V Figure 6 8 S S _ o o u E 0 0 s F. G. 9 0 In that event, a Burial Treatment Plan for this site will be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The plan will essentially call for the establishment of a landscaped buffer surrounding the site. It should be noted that should there be any inadvertent finds during the construction phase of the project, work will stop until clearance from the Planning Department has been secured. Based on the above, it is believed that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts generated by this project will not be significant. Valued Cultural Resources In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PAW and "Ka Pa'akai O 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 traditional and customary practices of this site. In this situation, the subject site is not adjacent and/or proximate to the shoreline. There are no known or identified trails going through the site. As such, fishing and/or coastal access should not be an issue. It is not known whether the subject or immediate surrounding area was ever used for the gathering of plants by native Hawaiians. However, as the site is overgrown with introduced vegetation, it would appear very unlikely that the site would serve such purpose today and/or in the recent past. There is, however, a burial on the site. As such, unfettered access to descendants will be allowed to this site. This will be reflected in the approved Burial Treatment Plan. Based on the above, with the planned mitigation, it does not appear that the project would have any adverse impact relating to the cultural and historical resources of this area. Marine Environment Although the site is not a coastal property, it is proximate to it. As such, the concern for potential runoff and sedimentation associated 10 0 E with the construction and operation of the project will be there. The construction of buildings, roads, and other impermeable surfaces could also have a potential long-term impact. To address these short and long term potential concerns, the applicant proposes a number of measures. These include: Not directing any of the stormwater to the ocean. Drywells, subject to the State approval process, will be designed to accommodate this stormwater. ' . Through proper design, excess water will be directed to landscaped areas where the ground is a little more permeable and -- — can absorb -the additional -water. -The -County Grading- r mance;- ' which governs erosion and dust control during construction, will also be complied with. I n 1] U I I 1 Thus, there should be little, if any potential adverse impact on the marine environment if reasonable precaution is taken during and after the construction period. H. Noise, Air Quality, and Dust The existing noise environment consists of ambient noise levels resulting primarily from traffic and incidentally human activity, wind and foliage, surf, birds, and intermittent flyby events (helicopters and aircraft). In the short-term, the project will generate construction traffic and construction equipment noise. To mitigate these impacts, the applicant intends to comply with State Department of Health noise regulations. Other mitigation include limiting construction activities to certain periods of the day; requiring all construction equipment to have approved exhaust and muffler systems; and adhering to State DOH blasting measures. In the long-term, the noise impacts would be additional traffic and, of course, from the project itself. Due to the residential nature of the project, however, it is not anticipated that the noise level will increase appreciably. The proposed project should not generate any direct long-term air quality impacts. The only discernible impact would be associated with vehicular traffic to and from the site. While there will be an 11 VII. impact to the ambient air quality, the impact should not be significant particular with the anticipated low volume of traffic. Further, with higher EPA standards for automobile emissions, air quality impacts should be further mitigated. During the short-term, however, construction dust could affect the area's air quality. Dust control measures would be implemented by the applicant and would include watering, covering of open -bed trucks, taking winds patterns into consideration during earthwork, and initiating the landscaping early. INFRASTRUCTURE CONSIDERATIONS A. Road and Access The project site is located on the mauka side of Alii Drive, approximately 1 mile south of Lunapule Road and 1/2 mile north of Royal Poinciana Drive. AIF i Drive is a 2 -lane, County road, with a 30+ feet of pavement within a right-of-way of 50 feet in this area. The pavement is wide enough for pedestrian movements on both sides of the road. The posted speed limit is 30 mph. A Traffic Impact Analysis of this project was prepared by Witcher Engineering LLP (Appendix B). The study evaluated the traffic impact of this project relative to Alii Drive, Royal Poinciana Drive, and Lunapule Road. The evaluation compared the effects prior to the development of Alii Lani, Kona Hawaiian Village and Sea Ridge in 2000 and the current condition, after these projects have been built. Please note that the report indicated a projected density of 59 units, although only 58 are being proposed. The study calculated the levels of service (LOS) at various intersections to determine levels of impacts resulting from this project. LOS is based on the average stopped delay per vehicle for individual approaches and the intersection as a whole, with a range from "A" to 'T". A LOS "A" would be the ideal, with average delays of less than 5 seconds, while LOS "F" would be the worst, with average delays of 60 or more seconds and requiring mitigating measures. Based on this LOS approach, the study made the following findings and conclusions: Relative to the project intersection, the AM and PM level of service (LOS) would be "C", with or without a left -turn lane at Alii Drive. 12 IJ H L E F [I C--3 In the case of Lunapule Road, the existing and projected (with the project) AM or morning (6:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.) LOS for westbound traffic is "C" and "E" for the PM or afternoon (3:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.) During the same period, the AM LOS at Royal Poinciana Drive is "C" and "D" for the PM traffic. The LOS for southbound movements at both intersections was "A". The report thus concluded that "The levels of service at the intersections of Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street (sic) and Alii Drive and Lunapule Road are not significantly impacted by this development. In the case of Lunapule Road the intersection has been impacted seriously by several developments, whereas, these developments seem to have little impact on the intersection of Royal Poinciana and Alii Drive." The report further determined that a left turn lane from Alii Drive to the project site was not needed. It reasoned that this was not needed "since the level of service and approach delay remain the same." Water The site is presently serviced by the County water system. There is a water line along Alii Drive, which will be extended into the subject site. The anticipated water commitment for this project should not exceed 58 units. C. Wastewater The County has an 8 -inch sewer line along AH'i Drive. The applicant intends to discharge the project's wastewater into this system. D. Utilities Telephone and electrical services are already available to the site. E. Protective Services Being within an urban area, all of the required police, fire, and related services are available. Police protective services are provided from the stations at Kealakehe located less than 3 miles from the site and Captain Cook in South Kona. Within 5 miles from the site, there are 3 fire stations. These would be at Kailua-Kona, Kealakehe, and 13 • 0 Pu'uloa. There is also another station at Captain Cook. Emergency medical and paramedical services are also provided from these stations. The Kona Hospital at Kealakekua is located approximately 7 miles from the site and is managed by the State. VIII. OTHER CONSIDERATIONS A. View Plane The subject site is visible from Kuakini Highway, looking makai towards the ocean. As such, any development of the site will generate some measure of visual impact. However, there are some mitigating factors. For one, there are structures located makai of the subject site and the ocean that already obstruct the views of the coastline. As such, the proposed development should not result in the further diminution of coastal visual impact. Notwithstanding that situation, the proposed buildings will be less than what is already allowed in the existing Agriculture (A -5a) zone of 45 feet. All structures will be no higher than 35 feet tall, which is consistent with the requested Zoning Code's 35 -foot height requirement for a single-family residential zone. Then, too, instead of massive, monolithic structure(s) that normally accompany multiple - family projects, this project will have more but less dominating structures. With the proposed landscaping, the sense of visual scale should not be pronounced. Additionally, the distance of this site to the Highway (over 1,000 feet). As such, the distance, landscaping, and type of structures should all contribute to reduce the visual impact of this project from the Highway. Relative to the surrounding area, the subject site is somewhat bounded by a commercial use to the south, multiple -family residential developments to the north and west, and single-family residential to the east. As such, given the residential scale of this project with its extensive landscaping, the visual impact to surrounding areas should not be significant. 14 0 0 IB. Coastal Access ' The subject property does not abut the shoreline. It is more than 300 feet from the shoreline. There are other privately owned parcels between the subject property and the ocean. As such, the proposed ' improvements would have no impacts to any existing or planned coastal accesses in the area. ' IX. RELATIONSHIP TO SMA OBJECTIVES ' A. Recreational Resources The proposed improvements should not have any adverse impact to the recreational resources of the area. The property is not a coastal property, and there are intervening privately owned properties between the project site and the ocean. ' Furthermore, the project will provide open space and a passive recreational area. This should enable residents to recreate on site, ' and, as needed, go off site. B. Historical and Cultural Resources ' With the exception of the two burials, sufficient mitigation of the 0 15 remaining sites have been taken which should not affect the development of this project. A burial treatment plan will be prepared ' and submitted for the review and approval by the Hawaii Island Burial Council in the near feature. The approved mitigation will be implemented in conjunction with the development of this project. ' Tentatively, the plan would call the preservation and incorporation of the sites as part of the overall landscaping of the project. Access to ' lineal descendants would also be afforded. Further, should there be any inadvertent finds, work will immediately ' cease until clearance from the County Planning Department is secured. ' Relative to the site's potential cultural resources, the site is not a coastal property and does not have a history of providing indirect access to the shoreline. As noted earlier, the burials will be preserved ' and lineal descendants of the burials will be afforded access. Finally, there is no visible evidence that the site has been used for gathering of native plants for medicinal or food, particularly as the site is 0 15 C. D. E. E somewhat devoid of substantial vegetation. However, if legitimate claims are made, access will be provided. As such, the development of this site should not have any adverse impacts to native Hawaiian cultural or religious practices. Scenic and Open Space Resources As noted earlier, the site is located makai of the Kuakini Highway. However, the development of this site should not significantly impair the views of the shoreline. There are already structures between the ocean and the subject site which obstruct some of the near shore views. Then, too, the scale and design of the project would be visually less pronounced than a typical multiple -family residential project. As such, this project should not adversely impact any scenic coastal resources. The development of any site will diminish open space, and this project is no different. Thus, the goal is to mitigate this impact. In this situation, the structures will be residential in scale and the project (including the road rights-of-way) will be extensively landscaped. The landscaping and scale of the structures should help mitigate the visual loss of open space. Coastal Ecosystem The proposed improvements should not generate any adverse impacts to the area's coastal ecosystem. Although the structures and roadways may increase the volume of rainwater, they will be directed into existing or new drywells on-site and away from the ocean. The road rights-of-way will be grassed instead of paved, creating a greater permeable surface rather than the conventional street system. Further, the site is situated over 300 feet from the shoreline, and any direct interaction between the proposed improvements and the coastal water should not be excessive, if at all. Then, too, there already is a sewer line that fronts Alii Drive. This line will be extended within the project to accommodate all of the project's wastewater demand. Economic Uses With the long-standing melting global economies and global insecurities due in part to the threat of terrorism and health concerns 16 ' 0 0 1 t(such as SARS), it should be heartening to still find businesses willing to invest and develop properties. The community, in its Draft Kona ' Regional Plan, expressed a desire to keep the subject area for residential uses at a scale of 10 units per acre. In this situation, this will be less, and oriented to residents. Should approvals to develop ' this project be given, it will transform a vacant lot into a healthy residential community, convenient to places of employment. Furthermore, in this situation, the applicant is willing to develop the project consistent with the General Plan, Draft Kona Regional Plan, and other regulatory requirements. In so doing, it should directly and ' indirectly generate over 15 short-term, full and part-time employment in the construction and construction -related industries. New moneys will be circulated within the community. ' Upon its completion, this planned commercial and condominium complex should generate over a few full and part time jobs. Much of ' this would be for the maintenance of the common areas. F. Coastal Hazards Although the site is designated "X" on the Flood Insurance Rate map, it still falls within the Civil Defense Tsunami Evacuation Zone. However, with the advance early warning systems, there should be adequate provisions to address impacts from tsunami (with the exception of locally generated tsunamis). As the site is not located adjacent to the shoreline and over 300 feet away, normal winter storm waters should not be an issue for this 1 project. G. Managing Development ' While this function is more applicable to the "authority" or approving agencies, the request is intended to operate within the confines of the ' requested Single-family Residential (RS -7.5) Zoning Code, except as may be modified through the issuance of a PUD permit. Through the PUD process, some design variations would be sought, variations that ' would still not compromise public health and safety issues. All uses and density, however, would be consistent with the RS -7.5 zone. tIn this sense, this project would be consistent with said zoning. In that regard, this project would be consistent with the policy of "us(ing), ' implement(ing), and enforc(ing) existing law effectively to the 17 H. J. K. 0 0 maximum extent possible in managing present and future coastal zone management." Public Participation There is a statewide public advisory body called Marine and Coastal Zone Management Advisory Group (MACZMAG) that has the task, among other matters, of advising the lead agency (Office of State Plan) on coastal management issues. This includes a direct or indirect review of certain requests that may have statewide coastal zone management implications. Public participation in the review of the permitting process is also achieved through the use of sending notices to surrounding property owners of the submittal of this rezoning and SMA applications and another separate notice informing said owners of the date of the Planning Commission's required public hearing as well as the rights to request for participation via a contested case hearing for the SMA application. Beach Protection The subject property is not a coastal property and over 300 feet from the shoreline. As such, the policies and objectives relating to this matter do not apply. Marine Resources Mitigating measures will be taken during the construction and post - construction period of this project. Erosion control measures meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health and County Department of Public Works will be developed and implemented, particularly during the construction period. Drywells, if needed, meeting with the Underground Injection Control (UIC) requirements of the State Department of Health will be used to help address potential impacts from surface runoff after the project is completed. Then, too, the project's drainage will be directed to the landscaped areas within the project site, including the road rights-of-way, to further minimize the velocity and volume of surface runoff going into drywells. SMA CONCLUSIONS Based on the foregoing, it is concluded that the proposed improvements are consistent with the objectives, policies and 1V 0 0 guidelines of the Special Management Area Rules and Regulations. Specifically: ' A. The proposed project will not have any substantial, adverse environmental or ecological effect. Any effect that may result ' will be minimized to the extent practicable and is clearly outweighed by public health, safety and welfare, and other compelling public interest. ' Further, it will not generate any adverse effects by themselves or in conjunction with other individual developments, the ' potential cumulative impacts of which would result in a substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect and the elimination of planning options. Appropriate mitigating ' measures will be taken to address any potential adverse impacts of this project; ' B. The proposed uses - as discussed earlier - are consistent with the objectives, policies, and guidelines of the SMA Rules and Regulations; and C. The proposed uses are consistent with the County General Plan, Draft Kona Regional Plan, and the County Zoning Code. tAll of those documents earmark the subject site for resort uses, and the requested hotel use would be consistent with the resort ' designation. No zoning amendment is required to effectuate this request. ' X. IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE ANALYSIS A. Relationship Between Local Short -Term Uses of Environment ' and Maintenance and Enhancement of Long -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 applicant may eventually construct one or two dwellings on each of the site. ' Given the urban (RM -1.5) character of the areas makai and north of the subject site as well as the 10,000 square foot lot Kahakai Estates ' Subdivision to the east, there may be pressures for the subject property to be similarly zoned. And from the perspective of trying to create a community, the continued pattern of only multiple -family 19 residential uses may not necessarily be appropriate. Then, too, the , continued vacant, quasi -agricultural use may not also be appropriate. From a long-term productivity standpoint, then, the proposed 58 -lot , single-family residential development would provide a much- needed diversity of residential living options to the community. B. Irreversible and Irretrievable Commitment of Resources ' The subject site is already partially disturbed. As such, the project , should not result in an irreversible commitment of natural or archaeological resources. While there are some archaeological , resources on the site, appropriate mitigation (such as the preservation of the burial) will be taken. The soil on the parcel has been classified "D" or poor by the Land Study Bureau, representing poor agricultural potential. This is evidenced by the vegetation on the site. While the area is capable of supporting agricultural crops, it would not be suitable, given its surrounding urban uses. It is thus maintained that the creation of the 58 -lot project would not result in the loss of properties which may have significant agricultural resource potential. C. Mitigative Measures The applicant intends to make improvements, if necessary, to be consistent with the subdivision process, except as may be modified through the PUD process. And during the construction phase of this project, contractors will be obligated to comply with appropriate State noise and air quality standards. Should further unanticipated archaeological finds be discovered in conjunction with the 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 grubbing work would be done in conjunction with the required permits. This is to assure that the development of this site does not adversely affect the drainage of the surrounding areas. Finally, as the site is vacant, there will be no person or businesses to be dislocated by this project. all ' D. Alternatives to the Proposed Proiect 1. No Proiect ' Under the status quo alternative, the site will continue to remain in its fallow state or limited agricultural use. It could ' also remain a fire hazard, during periods of drought. The site could also be developed with 1 or 2 dwellings on each ' of the lot. Given the present mixture of land uses and lot sizes in this ' area and proximity to urban areas, the site may not be utilized to its fullest family -agricultural potential. 2. Altemative Density Under this alternative, the applicant could seek a more ' intensive zoning, such as RM -1 to RM -4 zoning. All of these zoning categories would arguably be consistent with the RM -1 zoning on the makai and north sides of the subject site. They ' would also be consistent with the General Plan and land use concept map of the Draft Kona Regional Plan. Such an approach, however, may not be compatible with the policy of trying to foster a mixture of residential type within an ' urban environment. Then, too, a denser project would add more stress to the area's infrastructure. ' 3. Evaluation of Altematives ' The project's impacts to the area's social and physical infrastructure would not appear to be significantly 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. ' the In view of the aforementioned, it would appear that none of alternatives would be more prudent and beneficial than the ' requested RS -7.5 alternative. 21 XI. • 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 County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) map is not intended to be specifically measurable. As noted earlier, the site is generally designated Resort and Urban Expansion. A Resort Area includes "uses such as hotels, condominium -hotels (condominiums developed and/or operated as hotels), and supporting services." Urban Expansion areas "Allows for a mix of high density, low density, industrial and/or open designations in areas where new settlements may be desirable, but where the specific settlement pattern and mix of uses have not yet been determined. Within areas designated for development as resorts, portions of the resort area may be included in the urban expansion area." The proposed residential development would be consistent with those designations. As such, no General Plan amendment would be required to effectuate this project. The proposed revision to General Plan recommends that this area be changed to Medium Density Urban. This designation suggests land uses that are "Village and neighborhood commercial and residential and related functions (3 -story commercial, residential — up to 35 units per acre." Based on the requested Single-family Residential (RS -7.5) zone, the project would be consistent with the existing and proposed General Plan LUPAG designation, and no amendments would be required. 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 residential development. Relatedly, longer-term opportunities could be created largely in the form of maintenance of the private roads/landscaping within the project and the creation of a stable 22 1 11 I H F community. In so doing, the resultant project should add sustained 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) 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 disposed off in the County's system along Alii Drive. 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. Being a residential project, it should not be a noisy one. Any noise -generating facility - such as air conditioners - would be carefully placed to minimize their noise impacts to adjoining properties. The project area is outside of any floodway. Nonetheless, 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 have some archaeological sites. The burials will be preserved, and other mitigative measures will be taken. Furthermore, 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 partially disturbed and within an urban environment, the prospects of the site serving as a habitat for rare or endangered plant or animal life appear remote. As this is a residential project, it will directly fulfill the objectives of the housing element. Specifically, these include goals, among others, which 23 • 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 • Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing stock • Seek sufficient production of 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 The Plan also emphasizes that developments be mindful of an area's natural beauty. In this situation, the project will be developed in a manner where it blends with the existing terrain and enhances the natural environment through the introduction of landscaping. Although the project site is about 300 feet from the ocean, it is also separated by other developments from the ocean. As such, some of the usual coastal resources concern would not be pronounced. There will be no interference with shoreline access. Then, too, by hooking up into the County's wastewater system, impacts to the coastal water should be minimized. There will be little impact to public facilities. The roadway and related system within the project site will be private. The water system will be developed in a manner meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. All on-site improvements will be constructed by the applicant. Schools and other public facilities are also located proximate to the site, most of them being less than 5 miles away. Finally, in terms of the Land Use element, the pertinent goals, policies, and standards of the General Plan note the following: Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural and physical environments of the County The County shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment 24 ' 0 0 ' Zoning requests shall be reviewed with respect to General Plan designation, district goals, regional plans, State Land Use District, ' compatibility with adjacent zoned uses, availability of public services and utilities, access, and public need ' The county shall encourage the development and maintenance of communities meeting the needs of its residents in balance with the physical and social environment ' In view of the foregoing goals and policies, it is noted that the requested zoning would be consistent with the Resort and Alternate ' Urban Area of the LUPAG map. It would also be compatible with the surrounding area. There are multiple -family residential zonings (RM -1.5, RM -2, V-1.5) adjacent and proximate to the subject site. ' There is also a residential subdivision mauka of the site and across of the proposed Alii Parkway. ' The soil of the site is classified "M or poor. While it does have some measure of agricultural potential, as evidenced by the existing vegetation on the site, the site does not have resource that is deemed ' to be critical from an agricultural perspective. Furthermore, this area is bounded by urban uses. ' The property has no severe topographic or geologic problems that would render the land unusable for the proposed subdivision and activity. 1 1 I 25 r • APPENDIX A Archaeological Inventory Survey — Ali'i Drive Parcels Land Of Puapua'a 2°d, North Kona District Island of Hawaii (TMK: 3-7-5-20: 71, 72) Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. July 2003 I 1 1 i 1 1 1 0 Report 1340-070103 Archaeological Inventory Survey AIN Drive Parcels Land of Puapua`a 2nd, North Kona District Island of Hawaii Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. Archaeological • Hislorical • Cultural Resource Management Studies & Services * V I Report 2340-070203 , Archaeological Inventory Survey Alii Drive Parcels --Land-of-P-uapua-a-2-nd-North Kona -District Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-20:71,72) BY James A. Head, B.A. Supervisory Archaeologist Susan T. Goodfellow, Ph.D. Laboratory Director Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D. Principal Archaeologist PREPARED FOR Randy and Denise Farleigh do Carrie Nicholson Clark Realty Corporation 75-5722 Kuakini Tower, Suite 103 Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 JULY 2003 PNIIPaul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. Archaeological • Historical • Cultural Resource Management Studies & Services HAWAII: 224 Wal nuanua A.. • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • (BOB) 969-1763 GUAM: P.O. Box 23305 • G.M.F.. Gunn %921 • (671) 472-3117 ' PREFACE ' The fieldwork for the initial archaeological inventory survey for the Alii Drive Parcels project area was completed in October 1991, and a draft report on the fieldwork findings was completed in April of 1992 (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992). Due to client financial and development concerns, however, the report was never finalized and never submitted for regulatory review by the Hawaii State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). Recently, the project, under new ownership, was reactivated. At the request of our client, Clark Realty Corporation, acting on behalf of their client, Mr. and Mrs. Randy Farleigh, PHRI was asked to complete the ' inventory survey project and to submit the inventory report for SHPD review. Because the fieldwork for the report was conducted in 1991, and the report originally written in 1992, a number of concerns arose. The primary concern was that since 1991, SHPD review standards for archaeological inventory survey reports have gradually been revised and upgraded. The existing report, therefore, would have to be evaluated and ' revised to meet current standards. PHRI Principal Archaeologist Dr. Paul H. Rosendahl discussed this issue with Dr. Ross Cordy, Chief Archaeologist, and Dr. Patrick McCoy, Hawai' i Island Staff Archaeologist for the SHPD. Based on the consultations, PHRI then formulated specific tasks needed to upgrade the previous ' study to current standards, as outlined in Chapter 276: Rules Governing Standards for Archaeological Inventory Surveys and Reports: Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR; Subtitle 13, SHPD (May 2001;draft rules). ' One of the specific tasks was to conduct additional inventory fieldwork in the project area. This fieldwork included relocation and updated assessments of condition and significance for all previously identified sites, and detailed recording as necessary to upgrade existing field records and to document any ' newly identified sites or features. After this additional fieldwork was conducted, the earlier draft report (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992) was to be revised to incorporate the fieldwork findings. The specific manner in which the previous draft report was to be revised, therefore, was considered. In revising ' the report, it was decided that the integrity of the initial draft report, for the most part, should be maintained, and that the bulk of the information to upgrade the report should be placed in an appendix. This was deemed necessary in order to clearly demarcate work that took place in the past, and work that took ' place recently. Without this demarcation, confusion could arise; for example, there has been substantial archaeological work done in the vicinity of the project area subsequent to the original inventory survey. To place information on these subsequent archaeological projects in the Previous Archaeological Work section of the original report would be misleading and might create confusion regarding matters such as the ' chronology for site identification in the vicinity. Appendix C of the current revised report, contains the following information to upgrade the report: ' 1. Summary of archaeological work conducted subsequent to the fieldwork for the initial inventory survey (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992); ' 2. Discussion of settlement patterns and predicted site patterns for the project area; 3. Plan maps for sites in the original report (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992) ' lacking such maps; EM 4. Selected photographs of site and features; and 5. A review of general significance assessments and recommended treatments for all sites identified in the project area. Leonard Kubo Senior Editor July 2003 Reference Cited Head, J.A., S.T. Goodfellow, and P.H. Rosendahl 1992 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Alii Drive Family Housing Project. Land of Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-20:71,72). PHRI Report 1067-092691. Prepared for CRL Development, Inc. I iv SUMMARY Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. (PHRI) in 1991 conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the ' approximately 10 -acre Alii Drive Parcels project area, located in the Land of Puapua'a 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawai'i (TMK:3-7-5-20:71,72). During the fieldwork, 14 sites consisting of more than 36 component features were identified. Three of these were previously known sites (6335, 6336, 6337) consisting of seven component features. The project area features comprised the following formal types: t wall, enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well. The features comprised the following functional types: habitation, agriculture, agriculture/possible habitation, indeterminate, possible boundary, habitation/agriculture, and burial. ' Thirteen of the sites identified during the current project are assessed as significant solely for information content. No further archaeological work is recommended for any of these sites. Testing at ' Features D and E, Site 16116, during this inventory, however, revealed human burials. This site is assessed as significant for information content, for cultural value, and as an excellent example of a site type. Preservation "as is" is recommended for Features D and E. 1 1 1 • 0 V Contents Introduction • I Background I Scope of Work 1 Project Area Description 2 Previous Archaeological Work • 2 Summary of Historical Documentary Research • 8 Field Methods and Procedures • 8 Findings II Surface Findings 1 I Subsurface Findings • I I Data Analyses by Susan T. Goodfellow, Ph.D. 26 Age Determinations • 26 Portable Artifacts 28 Midden • 30 Conclusion 33 Evaluation of Survey Methodology • 33 Discussion • 33 Suggested Future Research 38 General Significance Assessments and Recommended General Treatment 39 References Cited 41 Appendix A: Site Descriptions Appendix B: Historical Documentary Research By Lehua Kalima Appendix C: Information to Update Original Inventory Survey I I Figures Figure 1. Project Area Location Map 3 Figure 2. Site Location Map • 4 Figure 3. Site 16116, Agricuhural/Burial Complex • 10 Figure 4. Functional Disribution of Sites • 15 Figure S. Sample Map of Kona Field System at Site 16116 • 16 Figure 6. Site 16114, Habitation Terrace • 17 Figure 7. Site 16117, Habitation/Agricuhurol Platform • 18 Figure 8. Site 16116, Feature D, TU4, East Face (PHRI Neg. 1870-26a) 20 Figure 9. She 16116, Feature G, TU -6, East Face (PHRI Neg. 1894-(9a) 22 Figure A -I. Site 16113 • A -I Figure A-2. Site 16115 • A-5 Figure A-3. Site 16116, Feature D, TU -1 • A-7 Figure A-4. She 16118 • A-9 Figure A-5. Site 16133 • A-10 Figure 8-1. Portion of the Kailua Section of North Kona in the Late 1920s B•3 Figure C-1. She 6335, Wall C-13 Figure C-2. Site 6336, Wall C-14 Figure C-3. Site 6337, Feature C, View to West -Southwest C-15 FigureG4. Site 6337, Feature D, Platform, View to West -Southwest C-16 Figure C-5. Site 16111, Feature C, Windmill Platform, View to North C-17 Figure C-6. She 16111, Feature A (Wall), Feature B (Mound), View to South -Southwest C-18 Figure G7. Site 16113, Feature A, Enclosure, View to East -Northeast • G19 Figure C-8. Site 16113, Feature B, C -shape, View to West -Northwest • C-20 Figure C-9. She 16114, Terrace, View to West -Northwest C-21 Figure C 10. She 16115, Feature E Enclosure, View to East C-22 Figure C-1 I. Site 16115, Feature E, Enclosure, TU -1, Post Excavation • C-23 Figure C-12. Site 16116, Feature A Mound, View to North -Northwest • C-24 Figure G13. She 16116, Feature B, Upright and Mound, View to East -Northeast C-25 FigureC-14. She 16116, Feature C, Mound, View to North -Northwest C-26 Figure C-15. Site 16116, Feature D, Platform, View to North -Northwest C-27 Figure GI6. She 16117, Platform, View to North -Northeast C-28 Figure C-17. She 16118, Enclosure • C-29 Figure C• 18. She 16119, Terrace, Northwest Comer, West Face, View to East -Southeast • C-30 Figure C-19. Site 16133, Feature B, Terrace, View to East -Southeast • C-31 Figure C-20. Plan View of She 6325 • C-32 Figure C-11. She 6325, Feature K TU -1320.33, East Face Profie • C-33 Figure C-22. She 6337, Feature B C-34 Figure C-23. She 6337, Feature C C-35 Figure G24. Site 6337, Feature D C-36 Figure C-25. She 15108 • C-37 Figure C-26. She 16119, Feature A C-38 vi W, w Tables vii Table I. Correlation of Site Numbers • 8 Table 2. Summary of Identified Sites and Features • 12 Table 3. Frequencies of Formal Feature Types 14 Table 4. Frequencies of Functional Feature Types 14 Table 5. Sununary of Radiocarbon Age Determinations • 27 Table 6. Detailed Distribution of Portable Artifacts 29 Table 7. Detailed Distribution of Midden • 32 Table B. Summary of General Significance Assessments and Recommended General Treatments • 40 IJ I • 0 BACKGROUND Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. (PHRI), conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the approximately 10 -acre AIN Drive Family Housing Project project area, in the Land of Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-20:71,72). The overall objective of the survey was to provide information sufficient for satisfying all historic preservation regulatory review requirements of the Hawaii County Planning Department (HCPD) and the Department of Land and Natural Resources - State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD). The survey field work was conducted September 9-20, and October 21-31, 1991 under the guidance of Supervisory ArchaeologistJamesHead,B.A.,andHawaii Projects Director Alan T. Walker, B.A. Principal Archaeologist Dr. Paul H. Rosendahl provided overall direction for the project. Crew members included Field Archaeologists Jason Betryhill, Jack Harris, and Jeffrey Putzi, B.A. The field work took approximately 480 labor -hours to complete. SCOPE OF WORK The basic purpose of an inventory survey is to identify— todiscoverandlocate onavailablemaps—features ofpotential amhaeologicalsignificancepresent withmthe speciftedproject area. An inventory survey is an initial level of archaeological investigation It is extensive rather than intensive in scope, and is conducted with the printary aim of determining the presence or absence of archaeological resources within a specified project area. Asurveyof this type indicates boththe general nature and the variety of archaeological remains present, and the distribution and density of such remains. It permits a general si gnificanceassesstnent of the archaeological resources, and facilitates formulation of recommendations and estimatesfor any mitigation workthatmight be necessary or appropriate. Such work could include intensive survey— further data collection involving detailed recording of sites and features, and selected test excavations. It might also include subsequent data recovery research excavations, construction monitoring, interpretive planning and development, and/or preservation of sites and features with significant scientific research, interpretive, and/or cultural values. The basic objectives of the present survey were fourfold: (a) to identify (find and locate) all sites and site complexes present within the project area; (b) to evaluate the potential general significance of all identified archaeological remains; (c) to determine the possible impacts ofpropcsed development upon the identified remains; and (d) to define the general scope of any subsequent further data collection and/or other mitigation work that might be necessary or appropriate. Based on a review of readily available background literature, familiarity with the project area, extensive familiarity with the current requirements of pertinent review authorities, and on discussions with Mr. Livingston of CRL Development, Inc. the following specific tasks were determined to constitute an adequate and appropriate scope of work for the inventory survey: 1. Review archaeological and historical literature relevant to the project area, and conduct limited historical documentary research (with an emphasis on readily available documentary sources) and interviews with any appropriate and available local informant sources; 2. Conduct 100% coverage, high-intensity ground survey of the project area; 3. Conduct limitedsubsurface testing of selectedsites and features identified within the project area (a) to determine the presence or absence of potentially significant buried cultural features or deposits, and (b) to obtain suitable samples forage determination analyses; and 4. Analyze field and historical research data, and prepare appropriate reports. The inventory survey was carried out in accordance with the standards for inventory -level surveyrecommendedby the Department of Land and Natural Resources - State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD). The significance of the archaeological remains identified in the project area was assessed intermsof (a) the National Registercriteriacontained in the Code of Federal Regulations (36 CFR Part 60), (b) the criteria for evaluation of traditional cultural values prepared by the National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and (c) PHRI Cultural Resource Management (CRM) value modes. DLNR-SHPD and the Hawaii County Planting Department both use these first two criteria to evaluate eligibility for both the Hawaii State and National Register of Historic Places. INTRODUCTTON PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION The project area is a c. 10 -acre parcel situated C. 40-80 ft (12-24 m) above mean sea level (AMSL), and located c. 250- 500 ft (76-153 m) from the Pacific Ocean. The project area is bounded on the west by Alii Drive, on the east by the proposed Alii Drive Realignment Corridor and additional land within Puapuaa 2nd, and on the north and south by additional land within Puapuaa 2nd (Figures I and 2). The project area is part of the Kona Lava Plain, a low- cliffed volcanic coast (defined by Armstrong (1983:37) as coastline with wave -cut cliff—avenge height about 20 ft [6 m]). The surface of the project area and vicinity was formed by HuaWai Volcanic Series flows which may be Late Pleistocene in age. In general, the lava flows are highly permeable, but carry brackish water along the coast (Stems and MacDonald 1946:140). Terrain in the project area is gently undulating and consists of soils included in the Puu Pa-Pakini-Waiaha association: shallow to deep, nearly level to steep, well - drained to somewhat excessively drained soils that have a medium -textured subsoil or medium -textured underlying material; on uplands. This association is found in leeward areas (e.g. small areas of North and South Kohala, North and South Kona, and at Ka Lae (South Point) in Kau (Sato, et al. 1973:7). More specifically, soil in the project area consists of Punaluu extremely rocky peat (6-20% slopes), representing the Punaluu series of well -drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava bedrock They are found on uplands from sea level to 1000 ft (305 m), and are rapidly permeable, with slow run-off, and a slight erosion hazard. This soil is used for pasture (ibid.:48). Rainfall in the project area is c. 30 to 40 inches (118-157 mm) per year, and the mean annual temperature is approximately 75 degrees F. (24 degrees C.) (Armstrong 1983:63-64). Vegetation within the project area varies in densityfrom moderate to heavy, and consists primarily of introduced exotics such as kiawe (Prosopis pallida [Numb, and Bonpl. ex Willd.] HBI), 'opiunta (Pithecellobium dulce [Roxb.] Bentlf.), African tulip tree (Spathodea campanulara Beauv.) and koa-haole (Leucaena glauca (L.] Benth), scattered monkeypod (Santaneasaman [Jacq.] Merr.), lantana (Lantana cantara [L.]), guinea grass (Panicurrt maximum Jacq.), bitter yam (Dioscorea bulbifera L.) and other exotic grasses and weeds. One indigenous plant, 'ilinta (Sida fallax [L.]) was observed in the area. FV PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK Both the Lands of Puapuaa 2nd and the sutramding ahupua'a have been subjected to numerous archaeological inventories and mitigation projects, stermning from the proposed Alii Drive Realignment Studies (Ching et al.1973, Soehren 1978, Hommon and Rcsetdahl 1983, Walker and Rosendahl 1985a), the Kahakai Development Project (Welch 1982, Walker and Rosendahl 1984, Walker and Rosendahl 1985b, Landrum, et al. 1990), the Pualani Residential Community (Walker and Rosendahl 1988, Carlson and Rosendahl 1990, Graves 1991x, 1991b, 1991c, and in prep.) and the Kuakini Highway Realignment Corridor (Schilt et al. 1984). Other projects conducted within the general area include Dye (1978) Hammatt (1980), Robins, et al. (1990), and Head et al. (1991). In 1973, ArchaeologicalResearchCenterHawaii (ARCH) initially surveyed the Alii Drive Realignment Corridorportion of the current project area for Belt, Collins, & Associates (Ching et al. 1973). The objective of that surface survey was to "...locate, identify, describe, and indicate a priority of importance for every feature of archaeological value with the assigned study area" (Ching et al. 1973:25). Three sites containing six component features were identified in the portion of the corridor within the present project area. the features consisted of wall shelters and a platform (Site 6325a b*), walls (Sites 6336, and 6337), and U-shaped shelters (Site 6337a). The features comprised the following functional types: habitation, possible burial, and boundary. Ching et al. (1973) recommended that further archaeological mitigation work at the sites be completed prior to site destruction. In early 1978, Dye conducted reconnaissance surveys of four parcels being considered as sites for the proposed Kahakai Elementary School. The area designated as Parcel A (which was not bulldozed) contained four archaeological sites along with"...amorphous mounds of loosely piled rocks, usually found in association with an exposed pahoehoe outcrop" (Dye 1978:14). Site 50 -Ha -D7-6 was a 1.4 m high L-shaped wall, 3.0 by 4.0 m long, with a wooden post and an attached wire at the end ofthelongerwall. SiteD-7wasalow, rectangular platform of basalt Site D-8 was asmalllava-tube cave containing the remains of marine gastropods, other invertebrates, and kukui. Site D-9 was arectangular enclosure measuring 13.5 by 12.0 by 0.45 m high. Dye recommended that "Accurate location and plane -table mapping of Site D7- 6, -7, -8, and -9, with limited test excavations at Sites D7-7, -8, and -9 would mitigate the effects of school construction at this site" (1978:19). " State Inventory ofHistoricPlaces(SIHP) site designationsystencallfoui-digitsitenumbersprefxedb50-10-37(50-State of Hawaii, 10=Island of Hawaii, 37-USGS 75' series quad map ["Kealakekua, Hawaii]). INTRODUC77ON 3 A Iz d _Ydd V r n 1�m t+1 ,d m LL IOLL � 7 r / V1 3 A I H 0 1 1 1 V 1 I I Il I • 0 INTRODUCT70N In 1978, Soehrenconducted anarchaeological inventory survey of c. 50 acres (202 ha) along the inland (east) side of Ilii Drive. The survey area included the present project area (Soehren 1978). Within the present project area Soehren reidentified one site (Site 6325) initially recorded by Ching et al. (1973) and located two additional sites (Sites N and O). Site Nwas interpreted to be apossible burial site; the function of Site O was not stated. Soehren stated that with the exception ofpossible graves,"[nlofeatures were found in this survey which have major archaeological or historical significance" (1978:1). Beginning in 1980,archaeological workincluding survey and salvage excavations inthe Kuakini Realignment Corridor (Schilt 1984) was undertaken by for the State of Hawaii by B.P. BishopMuseum,DepartmentofTransportation. Formal feature types in the corridor included platforms, enclosures, modified outcrops, and open soil areas. Functional types in the corridor area included agriculture, habitation, transportation, and ranching. Thirty-three volcanic glass and six radiocarbon dates derived during the corridor study indicated that the dryland agricultural and temporary habitation features within Puapuaa were initially utilized between c. AD 1400 and some time c. 1600 to 1650. Intensive agriculture and semi-permanent or permanent habitation followed from about AD 1600 to 1650 period, until 1779 and continued intotheearly I800s(Schilt 1984:277- 278). Then, about AD 1799-1850, aperiod which coincides with the decline of the indigenous Hawaiian population, agriculture in the area was on the decline or was abandoned (Schilt 1984:281-282). Schilt states that garden -related areas and a seasonal habitation site were "situated atop small to large, prominent outcrops"(1984:281). In 1980, Hammatt conducted an archaeological survey of a shoreline property in the Land of Puapuaa 1st., located just to the northand west of theproject area, across AM Drive. The size of the survey area appears to have been c. 38.0 acres (15.4ha) and two archaeological sites were located. Site 6439 was a platform and "may be the foundation of a large Hawaiian hale" (Hammatt 1980:ii). The other site, called Kauakaiakaola Heiau (Site 3836), "is a major Hawaiian temple mentioned in Ellis and thought to be associated with Kamehameha I. It was restored in 1947 and is now covered with vegetationand has some crumbling walls particularly on the nakai side" (ibid:ii). Testing was recommended for the platform if its location were planned for development. The heiau was recommended for preservation and possible integration into development plans. In 1982, Welch returned to the Parcel A area (Dye 1978) to conduct archaeological salvage operations. In addition to the two sites (D7-8 and 137-9) found by Dye (1978) in the Lands of Puapusa 2nd, six other sites (D7-71, -73, -74, -75, -76, and -78 were located in Puapuaa 2nd. Welch (1982) argues that the lava tube cave (D7-8) was used for habitation with indications that the cave was used as an activity area and not as a refuse area He also indicates that the high stone platform (Site D7-74) may have been a religious shrine, but no evidence of a burial was found in the bubble below. The remainder of the sites in the project area appear to have been used primarily for agricultural purposes, with some serving multiple functions. In early 1983, Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) re- inspected the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor portion of the present project area for Belt, Collins & Associates. The purpose of the survey was to provide archaeological data to update the environmental impact statement being prepared for Hawaii County by Belt, Collins & Associates. Because the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor portion of the present project areahadbeenpreviously surveyed (Ching eta1.1973), the Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) investigation focused on determining which sites and features were still present and evaluated the reliability of the earlier recording. In addition to the four sites and six component features identified by Ching et al. (1973), Hommon and Rosendahl identified three new features in the vicinity of Site 6337 (Hommon and Rosendahl 1983:field records). These three features were subsequently designated Sites 63376 (habitation terrace), 6337c (possibleburial platform), and 6316 (possible burial platform) (Walker and Rosendab11985a). Site 6316 is a wall in another portion of the corridor (Ching et al. 1973, Hommon and Rosendahl 1983), and Walker and Rosendahl (1985a) identify Site 6316 as a platform. Based on the findings of their survey, Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) recommended that the area surveyed by Ching et al. (1973) (the portion of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor withinthe present project area) be subjected toreconnaissance (mventory) survey. In 1984, PHU conducted a reconnaissance survey of TMK Parcel 76 and a portion of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor (Walker and Rosendahl 1985a). The survey was an addendum tothefull archaeological reconnaissancesorveyof theKahakai Developmentproject area (WalkerandRosendahl 1985b). Four sites (Sites 6316, 6325, 6336, and 6337) consisting of nine component features were identified in the portion of the corridor contained within the present project area. Site 6316 was misnumbered by Walker and Rosendahl (1985a); Site 6316 is actually another site in a adjacent ahupta'a. During the present survey, Site 6316 (Walker and Rosendahl 1985a) was renumbered as Site 1001-5. Based on 0 0 IN7RODUC77ON the findings of their survey, Walker and Rcsendahl (1985a) reconunendednof niherwerkforSite6336. Fortheremaining sites (Sites 6316 [1001-5], 6325, and 6337) mitigation was recommended. In 1985, PHRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey and test excavations at Kahakai Development project area, a c. 115 ave (46.5 ha) parcel situated in the Lands of puapuaa 1st and 2nd (Landrum et al. 1990). During the project, 46 sites (consisting of 206 features) were identified, of which, three were newly identified. The features included boundary walls, cave shelters, habitation structures, terraces, mounds, platforms, burials, a historic roadbed, recent cattle enclosures, shrines, and a possible heiau. Subsurface testing occurred as part of the project. A total of 118.3 sq m was excavated withmarine mollusc shell being themostcommonitem. Fifteenhumanburials were identified as well. Of the 46 sites identified in the area, 26 were found to be significant solely for information content. No further wok was recommended for 20 of these sites; the remainder (6) were recommended for further data collection. Six of the remaining 20 sites were assessed as significantfor information content and cultural value. Further data collection and preservation "as is" was recommendedfor twoof thesix sites, and further data collection and disinterment and reinterment was recommended for the four remaining sites. Five sites were assessed as significant for information content and were provisionally assessed as significant forculturalvalue. Further data collection and provisional disinterment and reinterment was recommended for these sites. Four sites were assessed as significant for information content, as excellent examples of site types, and provisionally significant for cultural value. Further data collection followed by provisional disinterment and reinterment was recommended for these sites. Two sites were assessed as significant for information content and were provisionally assessed as having cultural value. Further data collection and provisional preservation "as is" was recommended for these sites. Two sites were assessed as significant for information content, as excellent examples of site types, and as having cultural value. Following further data collection, preservation with interpretive development was recommended for these sites. Finally, one site was assessed as significant for information content and as an excellent example of a site type. Further data collection was recommended for this site (Landrum et al.:ii). In early 1988, PHU conducted an archaeological reconnaissance of the Pualani Subdivision project area, consisting of c. 100 acres (41 ha) in the lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd (Walker and Rosendahl 1988). The proposed project parcel was locatedmauka of theKuakini Realignment Corridor (Hawaii Belt Road) and while partially in the same ahupua `a as the present project area (Puapuaa 2nd), it is at a higher elevation. Seventy-six sites (including 129 component features) were recorded during the survey. Of the 76 sites, six had beenpreviously identified and 70 werenewlyfound. The sitesincludedbothsingle-andmulti-canponentsites. Formal feature types included terrace, trail, C- and L-shaped walled shelter, walled encle sure, freestanding wall, modified outcrop, platform, lava blister, boulder alignment, mound, historic railroad bed, and modified area Tentative functional types included habitation, transportation, agricultural, religious, possible burial, boundary wall, historic dump, and recent cattle ranching structure (wall, pen, and foundation). During the field work (Walker and Rosendahl 1988), portions of the Kona Field System (Newman 1970) were found throughout the project area. Previously declared eligible for inclusion to the National Register of Historic Places (NRNP), the Kona Field System (Site 6601) is a complex of aboriginal Hawaiian dryland cultivation and habitation remains extending from the Kailua area south to Hookena. In 1974, for the nomination of this agricultural complex to the Hawaii Register of Historic Places (Site 10- 37-6601), T. Stell Newman wrote: Themost extensive and monumental workof ancient Hawaii is the Kona Field System, lying along the western side of Hawaii Island. This field system is so extensive that it can only be appreciated from an airplane or by air photos, for it is an integrated complex of remains three by eighteen miles in size. The fields form a patterned network of elongated rectangles lying as a band parallel to the sea (Newman IN Schilt 1984:3). In 1990, PHRI conducted a 100% coverage, variable - intensity archaeological survey of c. 65 acres (26.3 ha) for the Pualani Development - Phase II project area in the Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd (Carlson and Rosendahl 1990). Sixty- foursites (138 componentfeatures) were identified during the course of the inventory. Limited subsurface testing also occurred at seven sites, and radiometric dates ranging from the eleventh to the twentieth century were returned. Fifty- sevenof the total of 64 sites wereassessedas significantsolely for information content. Of these 57 sites, seventeen will require no further archaeological work, while 40 were recommended for further data collection Of the remaining seven sites, four are assessed as potentially significant for cultural value and information content. These sites may contain burials; further data collection was recommended for them, and preservation"as is"wasprovisionallyrecommended, pending data collection results. Two sites were assessed as I 1 I I I 11 J 0 • INMODUMON significant for information content, as excellent examples of site types, and for potential cultural significance. Both sites maycontainburials. Forthesetwosites,furtherdatacollee ion was recommended, andpreservation "as is"was provisionally recommended, pending further data collection results. The final site was assessed as significant for information content and cultural value. This site is a burial cave containing the remains of at least four individuals. Further data collection and preservation "as is" was recommended. In 1990, Cultural Surveys Hawaii conducted an archaeological inventory survey and testing on 18.5 acres (7.5 ha) in the makai portion of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd ahupua`a (Robins et al. 1990). Fifty-seven sites were located including habitation structures, agricultural complexes, walls, and a probable burial structure. Limited testing offeatures forhumanburials was undertaken, as were tests for cultural deposits. With one possible exception, human remains were not present within the tested features. None of the total of 57 sites was recommended for preservation, and 38 sites were considered not significant or no longer significant. The remaining sites are considered significant for information content and were recommended for further data recovery (ibid.:i). In 1991, PHRI conducted an archaeological field inspection of the Alii Drive Family Housing project area (Walker 1991). Eight sites were identified in the field (Sites 6335,6336,6337,1001-1,1001-2,1001-3,1001-4, and 1001- 5). Previous archaeological work and informant information indicated there were three other sites in the project area that had not beenre-identified (Sites N, O, and 6325). Walker and previous archaeological researchers identified 11 sites in the project area. They consisted of more than 19 component features, and comprised the following formal feature types: wallshelter,platform, wall, U -shape shelter, terrace, enclosure, mound, and cairn. The features comprised the following functional types: habitation, possible burial, possible agriculmire, boundary, and indeterminate, Three features in the project area have undergone inventory -level survey work: Sites 6335, 6336, and 6337 (the wallfeature only) (Walkerand Rosendahl 1985x, Landrum et al. 1990). The remaining sites in the project area were only tentatively and generally assessed in the report, because they had notundergone inventory -level work All of the remaining sites, however, were assessed as probably significant for information content. It was also recommended that an inventory -level survey be conducted in the project area prior to any development activity. In 1991 PHRI provided amitigationplanforthe proposed Pualani Residential Community (Jensen 1990) and mitigation fieldwork was begun on the fust zoning increment (Graves 1991a). This work proceeded in fourphases (a) relocation of the sites to be recorded, (b) vegetation clearing and update of previous field records, (c) detailed mapping and description of each feature, and (d) test excavations. During this phase of the fieldwork, each of the 36 identified sites (within the Increment I planning zone) was relocated and subjected to further data collection. Also in 1991, PHRI performed mitigation within the second zoning increment of the Pualani Residential Community(Graves 1991b). Fieldworkwas carried outusing a phased approach similar to that applied during Graves 1991a. Data collection was completed at Site T-35 and at peripheral features of Site T-37. All 14 sites in the Increment II Planning Zone were relocated and subjected to further data collection Some sites were combined and two previously unidentified sites (Sites T-76 and T-77) were located and underwent detailed recording and auger testing. Also in 1991, Jensen (1991) assembled a Data Recovery Plan for the Pualani Development Company Wastewater Treatment Facility project area at the Pualani Development - Phase II project area in the Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd. Subsequently PHRI conducted archaeological data recovery at the proposed Wastewater Treatment Facility project area (Graves 1991b). Seventeen of the 64 identified sites found during the inventory survey of the Phase lI project area (Carlson and Rosendahl 1990) were located within the proposed WastewaterTreatment Plantproject area and all 17 sites were considered significant for information content only. Of these 17 sites, three were sufficiently recorded during the inventory survey, and no further work was recommended for them. Mitigation of the remaining 14 sites proceeded with a methodology similar to that outlined in Graves (1991a), and all wererelocated. Purtherdatacollectian was performed at all locations. In 1991, PHRI returned to the Alii Highway project area for the Phase 1(a) work (Dunn and Rosendahl 1991). The specific objective of the Phase 1(a) work was to identify (to determine the presence or absence of) any sites of such significance as to seriously constrainorprevent the proposed highway development. Such sites would most likely consist of burials, religious sites, and outstanding examples of site types. During the project, 136 sites consisting of more than 535 componentfeatures were identified withinorimmediately adjacent to the project area. Three of the sites, consisting of 71 features, were newly identified. Tfie sites identified consisted -of both complexes and single -feature sites, and they wereboth alteredand unaltered, with conditions ranging from poor to good. Formal feature a INTRODUCTION types identified include caim, C -shape, cave, cave with exterior platform, cupboard, enclosure, enclosure with platform and wall, filled crevice, filled paved blister, L - shape alignment, L -shape wall, midden scatter, modified outcrop,mound,paved area, paved depression, paved walled depression, petroglyph, platform, platform with adjoining wall, sealed cave, terrace, trail, U -shape, wall, and wall fragments. Based on their appearance at the time of field work, feature -type designations for sites were changed, in some cases, from their designations as assigned in Ching et al. (1973) and Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) surveys. Functional interpretations for the features included agriculture, boundary, burial, habitation, indeterminate, marker,possible burial,possible habitation, possible shrine, possible water catchment, recreation, shrine, and transportation. The functional interpretations are tentative, as further work is needed to substantiate the preliminary assessments. It was also noted that there were simple agricultural features throughout the entire project area, and that only a representative sample of them were recorded. Such features were recorded when they were concentrated in an area or when they constituted a variety of formal types. In 1991, PHU conducted an archaeological inventory survey at the proposed Alii Drive Sewer Project site (Head et al. 1991). The proposed site consisted of two parcels within c. 1000 feet (300 m) of each other: (a) a proposed sewer line easement in Pua'a 2nd and 3rd, and (b) the W aiaha Bay Sewer Pump Station (SPS) in Waiaha 1st and 2nd. During the field work, 20 sites consisting of more than 38 component features were identified. The features comprised the following formal types: enclosure, modified outcrop, paved terrace, filled blister, L-shaped wall, midden scatter, modified outcrop with alignment, trail, and walled overhang. The formal feature types comprised the following functional types: habitation, agriculture, boundary marker, clearing, storage, transportation, and habitation/agriculture. All 20 of the identified sites were assessed as significant solely for information content. No further work was recommended for three of the 20 sites. Further data collection was recommended for the remaining seventeensites (ibid.:ii). SUMMARY OF HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH The previous -discussion, when taken in conjunction with legendary accounts and historical documentation, indicates that use of the project area and vicinity has occurred from at least the 12thcentury AD. Thesedata can thenbe used to view previous archaeological work inPuapua'aas well as on-going archaeological research. Itnowseems that the maineconomy in the project area has been agricultural: gardening and food crops in the distant past, and in more recent times, animal husbandry. In general terms, there are indications that in 1824, a substantial number of people (approaching 20,000 inhabitants [including 3,000 at Kailua]) were living along the coast (Thurston IN Kelley 1983:14). Scattered temporary housing has also been located in upslope portions of the Kona Field System, with indications of lower status permanent housing still further upslope (Graves in prep.). Findings of archaeological investigations in the past have substantiated this, and the present project also confirms this to varying degrees. FIELD METHODS AND PROCEDURES The archaeological resource inventory performed at this location has resulted in the archaeological examination of c. 100% of the proposed impact area. This was accomplished using pedestrian transects (oriented east -west) ranging from 5.0 to 7.0 in apart, depending on terrain and vegetation density. The project area consists of two rectangular parcels (Lot 4A and Lot 5A) with the long axis turning east/west. Table 1. CORRELATION OF SITE NUMBERS SIHP PEW 6335 — 6336 — 6337 — 15108 1067-38 16111 1067-24 16112 1067-25 16113 1067-14 16114 1067-16 16115 1067-23 16116 1067-26 16117 1067-36 16118 1067-34 16119 1067-28 16133 1067-29 1 LJ 1 I 0 INTRODUCTION All identified sites were described on standard PHRI site survey record forms and were photographed using 35 mm black -and -white film. Detailed recording of sites included written descriptions, measurements, and plan maps. Each site, or the primary feature within the site complex, was marked with pink and blue flagging tape, and an aluminum tag bearing the temporary site number, the date, the letters "PHRI," and the PHRI project number (91- 1067). All newly identified sites were assigned one- or two - digit PHRI temporary field numbers prefixed with "1067-," beginning with "1067-l." All sites were subsequently assigned permanent State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) site numbers (Table 1). Several sites originally located during previous projects were also relocated. These sites were assigned PHRI temporary field numbers, but have retained their original SIHP designation. As noted earlier, minor agricultural features are ubiquitous in the project area. Because of the density and continuity of these features, it was deemed not feasible and not necessary to record all of them. Rather, a representative sample of them was recorded. To accomplish this a 25 m2 area within Site 16116 was cleared and mapped to illustrate the type of features present and their distribution. This is shown in Figure 3. The area of Site 16116 was chosen as it is typical of the project area: it contains a few major structural features (two major mounds and an enclosure) surrounded by numerous minor agricultural features such as small terraces and mounds. N During the testing phase of the inventory project, potential radiocarbon samples and soil samples were taken. Test excavations consisted of controlled test units and seventeen test units, which were placed at six sites. The number and placement of these test units were selected to thoroughly sample the sites and features in the project area. Test units were excavated with hand trowels, by natural stratigraphic layers. These units were excavated until bedrock or sterile soil was reached. Excavated material was screened through both 114 -in and 118 -in mesh screen, and all cultural materials were retained. When charcoal was found, samples were taken for radiocarbon age determination analysis. Excavation data was recorded on standard PHRI record forms. As during the reconnaissance phase of the survey, detailed 35 mm black - and -white photographs were taken to show both pre- and post -excavation views. It was also determined that further testing, mapping, and sampling of the Kona Field System (Newman 1970) should occur before completion of the fieldwork. All work was completed during the latter pan of October 1991. All burial units encountered during test excavations were left in place and the excavations were backfilled. 4 LU w tCLt� a6. r G gn N E t F c� w t ON Ypp W O a LL e LL r C W Cl � rtr t'A�.�, tL'et IQ LL 68i {tom LU � L b\ E t F I n 7 � O a LL E t 1 I 1 I I I 1 u I 1 I • 0 11 SURFACE FINDINGS Fourteenarchaeological sites, consisting of more than 36 component features, were identified in the project area. The sites were both prehistoric and historic. Three of them (6335, 6336, and 6337) were previously known and were included in the current project, because six of their seven known features are in the area of potential effectforthe proposed development. The site locations are shown in Figure 2. Table 2 summarizes thesites internis of componentfeatures,formal and functional types, pMU Cultural Resource Management (CRM) value mode assessments, and recommended field work tasks. Appendix A provides detailed descriptions for each site. The sites comprised six complexes (multi -feature sites) and eight single -feature sites, and include the following fonnalfeaturetypes: wall,enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well (Table 3). The sites comprised the following functional types: habitation, agriculture,aocurlture/possible habitation, indeterminate, possible boundary, retaining wall, habitation( agriculture, and burial (Table 4, Figure 4), The most common recorded formal feature type in the project area was terrace (N-9 or 25.2%) Othercommontypes included wall, enclosure, mound, platform, and modified outcrop. Themest commonfunctional types were agricultural (18 examples), with habitation and habitation/agricultural also represented. Site 16116, an agricultural/burial complex, is illustrated in Figure 4. Eight features have been recorded at this site. These include an enclosure, four mounds, two platforms, and a modified outcrop. The portion of Site 16116 illustrated in Figure 3 is shown on the left side of Figure 4. This site is located on gentle ntakai-sloping pahoehoe lava flows with nu merousoutcropsofbedrock. This slope is gentle throughout the site area, becoming flat near the Site 16112 location, immediately to the west. Vegetation on and surrounding the site is composed of exotics including kiawe, koa-hook, lantana, and guinea grass. An example of a habitation terrace was noted at Site 16114 (Figure 6). This single -component habitation site consists of a stacked, faced terrace built onto the south and west faces of a bedrock outcrop. The site is at c 300 m (994 ft) elevation, and the terrain is roughly level, with a slight westward slope to the ocean Vegetation includes kiawe, lantana, koa-haole, and guinea grass. Ahabitation/agriculturalplatfotmisfoundatSite 16117 (Figure 7). This is a medium-sized feature with a small cupboard or "well" built into the top. It is constructed of small -to -medium basalt boulders piled atop a bedrock outcrop. The site is found in an area of almost flat pahoehoe lava flows with numerous bedrock outcrops. Vegetation in the immediate area includes kiawe, lantana, 'ilima, guava, and guinea grass. SUBSURFACE FINDINGS Seventeen test units were excavated at six sites (16114, 16115, 16116, 16117, 16133, and 6337) in order to recover datable radiometric samples, to test for the presence of buried cultural deposits, and to determine the presence or absence of human remains. The units yielded ten radiocarbon samples, of which seven were dated. The units also revealed several midden samples (see Age Determinations and Midden sections), and disclosed the presence of human burials in two locations at Site 16116. All test units were backfilled and features were restored at the conclusionof the testing. Detailed descriptions of the unit stratigraphies follow. Site 16114, Feature A, TU -1 Site 16114 is a late prehistoric or historic terrace located in the south-central portion of the project area. Feature A is a stacked and faced terrace built onto the south and west faces of a bedrock outcrop, and may have served as a prehistoric habitation TU -1(1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed in the center. This feature appears to be built upon the ground surface, and excavation of TU -1 (placed in the center) ceased when bedrockwas encountered in all quadrants. The unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 63-75 cmbd; The upper level was of basalt which contained coral and sparse marine shell; cultural layer II Total layer thickness rumfmrn 75-90 cmbd. It was divided into two layers as discussed immediately below No • FINDINGS Table 2. SUMMARY OF IDENTIFIED STTES AND FEATURES *SE" Site No. Formal Site/Feature Type Tentative Functional Interpretation CRM Value Field Work Mode Assess. Tasks R I C DR SC EX 6335 Wall Agriculture L L L - - 6336 Wall Agriculture L L L 6337 Complex (5)** Poss. boundary/ M M M + habitation A Enclosure Habitation B Platform Habitation C Platform Indeterminate D Ten -ace Habitation E Wall Possible boundary 15108 Terrace Agriculture L L L - 16111 Complex (5) Agriculture L L L - - A Enclosure Agriculture B Enclosure Agriculture C Well Agriculture D Concrete Agriculture structure E Concrete Agriculture structure 16112 Wall Agriculture M L L - 16113 Complex (2) Habitation/ M L L agriculture A Enclosure Agriculture/ possible habitation B C -shape Habitation " SwtelnventoryofHWorieP/aces(SIHP)numbers.SlHPnumbersarefivedigitnumbersprefuedby5470.37(50-State of Hawaii, 10 -Island of Hawaii; 37-USGS 7.5'series quad map ('Kealahekua, Hawaii J)- Number of componentfeatures within complex Cultural Resource Management Value Mode Assessment: Nature: R - scientific research, I - interpretive, C - cultural Degree: H - high, M - moderate, L - low Field Work Tasks: DR - detailed recording (scaled drawings, photographs, and written descriptions), SC - surface collections, - BX - test excavations. 12 1 I I 1 i FINDINGS Table 2. (cont.) SIHP Site No. Formal Site/Feature Type Tentative Functional Interpretation CRM Value Field Work Mode Assess. Tasks R I C DR SC EX 16114 Terrace Habitation M L L 16115 Complex (5) Habitatianjindeteanmate/ M L L Agriculture A Terrace Habitation B Terrace Agriculture C Mound Indeterminate D Terrace Indeterminate E Enclosure Habitation 16116 Complex (7) Agriculture/ H L H + burial A Enclosure Agriculture B Mound Agriculture C Mound Agriculture D Platform Burial E Platform Burial F Modified outcrop Agriculture G Mound Agriculture H Mound Agriculture 16117 Platform Habitation/ M L L agriculture 16118 Enclosure Habitation M L L 16119 Terrace Habitation M L L 16133 Complex (3) Agriculture/ L L L possible habitation A Modified outcrop Agriculture/ W/Wall possible habitation B Terrace Agriculture C Terrace Agriculture 13 FINDINGS Table 3. FREQUENCIES OF FORMAL FEATURE TYPES Formal Type No. % SIHP No. Terrace 9 25.2 6337(D), 16114, 15108, 16115 (A,Bp), 16119, 16133(B,C) Enclosure 7 19.6 16111 (ABF), 16113 (A), 16115 (E), Habitation 9 25.2 16116 (A), 16118 Platform 5 14.0 6337 (CB), 16116 (D,E), 16117 Mound 5 14.0 16115 (C), 16116 (C D,GA Concrete structure 2 5.6 16111 (D,E) Wall 4 11.2 6337 (E), 16112, 6335, 6336 C -shape 1 2.8 16113 (B) Modified outcrop 2 5.6 16133 (A), 16116 (F) Well 1 2.8 16111 (C) OIA% `( `,35 1008 IN Table 4. FREQUENCIES OF FUNCTIONAL FEATURE TYPES Function Type No. % SIHP No. Agriculture 18 50.4 15108, 16111 (A-E), 16112, 16115 (B), 16116 (A -C, F -H), 16133 (B, C), 6335,6336 Habitation 9 25.2 6337 (A B D), 16113 (B), 16114, 16115 (A,E), 16118, 16119 Burial 2 5.6 16116 (D, E) Indeterminate 3 8.4 16115 (C, D), 6337 (C) Agriculture/possible 2 5.6 16113 (A), 16133 (A) habitation Habitation/agriculture 1 2.8 16117 Possible boundary 1 2.8 6337 (E) 14 1 1 I 1 I 1 t 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ,W __ OF �<U mF-U mm Q. 0 • _m Om g� vi QJ � M mU m QS SU Q O J 0 7 o m Q '-3hrr[n�x vvnwr.�nezTis 3 A I H Cl I I I V 8VR n i r m r6 FINDINGS GO a 16 I 1 1 1 0 FINDINGS 11 17 Figure 6. Site 16114, Habitation Terrace qr go Fe A Q TU -1 SITE TAO UPRIONT - d �q�.\ �.goa�Cs ', i'`" - U•� yi �,,. ', y X {` Y ZT �\ • 0,o o Yo 4PQ°� po Q// c` !g ;. �;., 'r M4 a yp 81\f 0. -_ �- I_I ' / \� 1 °..., IRI/ ; i% i C •/ /\v' N TEST UNIT BEDROCK \\ SOIL FLAT AREA i }t0 � KIAWE =Z' FACED WALL Figure 6. Site 16114, Habitation Terrace 0 • FINDINGS I ONSISTS OF ORALS, S. AND SAPLINGS QSITE TAO np t w 2 —_ M6 aTEST UNIT PILED BASALT COBBLES STACKED MALL BEDROCK Figure 7. Site 16117, Habitation/Agricultural Platform 18 0 FINDINGS II -1 75-85 cmbd; black (10YR 2/1 moist); silt; very ' dark brown (10YR 2/2 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; cultural layer ' II -2 85-90 cmbd; black (10YR 2/1 moist); silt; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2 dry); stmctureless; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; cultural layer III 90-110cmbd sodsampletaken&am65-70cmbd; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 moist); silt; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); structureless; loose, very friable, sticky, slightly plastic; cultural layer Site 16115, Feature E, TU -1 This site is a pre -contact agriculture/habitation site consisting of at least five features. Features A,.B, and D are terraces, Feature c is a rock mound, and Feature E is an enclosure. The Feature E enclosure consists of small stacks and piles of unshaped basalt in most of the oval alignment and portions of single -row alignment. The feature appears to have served as a prehistoric habitation, and the test unit (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed in the center. The unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 30-35 cmbd; very darkbrown (10YR 2/2 moist); dark reddish brown (5YR 3/3 dry); weak, very fine granularstructure; loose, very friable, non - sticky, slightly plastic Site 16115, Feature A, TU -2A Feature A at Site 16115 is an amorphous depression or cavity that was filled with basalt cobbles to fort a roughly level, paved surface. In the south-southeast portion, there is a small mound (34 courses high). TU -2 (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed over the depression; TU -2A (0.50 by 0.50 m) was placed within the blister cave found below. TU -2A displayed the follow stratigraphy: Layer Description 20.36 cmbd; dark brown (7.5YR 3/2 moist); silt; dark yellowish brown (10YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic Site 16116, Feature D, TU -1 (Figure 8) 19 The site is a large agriculture/burial complex consisting of more than eight features. Feature A is a tough enclosure, Features B, C, G and H are mounds, Features D and E are platforms, and Feature Fis a modified outcrop • Feature D is asmall,nioely built platfotmcortst rwW offourtofivecanses oftmshaped pahoehoe cobbles to medium boulders that are stacked and roughly faced. Feature D lies mostly atop the surface, although some footer stones are placed into it. The top is mostly flat and paved with a few smaller stones. No midden or artifacts were recovered from the test unit placed at the feature (TU -1). A human burial was located at the bottom of the test unfit. Excavation ceased in the unit when the burial was encamtered. TU -1 (1.0 by 1.0 m) displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description I 15-62 cmbd; consists almost exclusively of subangularbasalt ranging from medium cobbles to small and medium boulders; cultural level II 62-103 cmbd; soil samples were taken in an area between 62 and 65 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); silt; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, non -sticky, non- plastic; cultural level Site 16116, Feature E, TU -2 Feature E is a prehistoric platform that is well built and roughly square. All four sides are stacked and faced with easily discernible comers. It is constructed of basalt cobbles and small boulders stacked 3-4 courses high with the top exhibiting a slight slope to the east. This feature appears to have beenbuilt upon the ground surface. TU -2 (1.0 by 1.0m) was placed in the center of the feature and was excavated to c. 1.44 m below datum, where a human skull was located within what appears to be a prepared cist. The test unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 0-77 cmbd; this level consists of basalt small boulders and large to medium cobbles which are placed as platform construction; cultural level II Total layer thickness is 77-99 cmbd; an area between 77-78 cmbd was sampled; layers II and -Mg -737 1,' c �.: r` j J r y.' 1�►� E s }. O _ � "Ay Arno 14M 14- ...�#. a"ns' :er _• .h _ # �. - .4.�t max... '.:c X' 4s i,' gel a. a Fi '1r %�S`i1L .yy.,.��7 r k y,^ M��`R ��¢.,-•.t"i' .t' �¢� �..^ _.` t ��"�`a' �''`-Ji•'� } r. ' � � � 4kJ ,� �� t P +s xxY fes: n'.. t; ,.» --d c+� ,az^:..a,G,F Y �c K -z_ Gc,;,'E qF'+q Rr dEU`,. •.`�, r' - ,g + r'.AVE Y@t t yt yv z,; a, ss 4r r-' _07. ®R. r. r -:.nom+ §t'' '•. *w': `t $'. - cY c !," 1` t a v `5, $ai$�,,Y.,. 'i c.. s, �' k r e r -r �- '�F_ '�) ti � s Ta-^� .� 4- •s.. r� ;.j aq�.t�,1 -g,:�"r''r �r � r _Y�,h.�' 4: z a t ' - vS, y E" a y • ,tt ..t w ,. � K. s a �x..g zG.. L a '"'t � #° n ".. � _ AiQ a ,arm 5 T 3 Wit - ,a`r t s i .. Vis-,+."zY3'.`...,c �, n 4 .a t q" z- k P +3 •�„_„ .. x t'z` Y s" You £ � " ':# ...q r �' fia.+" t -t� �.� of � r � i�-'.a arm 2 oz- -rx 5`xsz' r E a<��E'�"° � rt s s t,� ; •a .: .ti'!'D�°' � �'1�"di s_ . x r a rF ^'`°` u`t. 3. sz a,+.: li !+4�r`y-4` s -� f-� r t>° s a•... ..F +%r �� 3 f' t..yt-'�,�'-�: _: `r'. „ y •sy ,,;:. �+�\ sfz'f £ •,^5r� 4a Y+ :r ,sxtY 5. :s' z,+, ,,'f,d' s.�� :•f'�"3. z»Y,�t _Y+f y, .K :�1+ i '5.r,d.. r cr• �' -. -- !F. 41V ' ;:^- a . t "i r��ra-�: _',,,3,'-�,•�2�`z+ +? a-�'� _ ,�-s• �l ;a(Q �' r " r v .,. � � {_' '��``. '�': �.t{ , t r`�� h��rx•�.�y.��•Y>�'x a�.v-... V� � + ,,.a r"�..: .rn Y .a '�•x''� �.r.�'^"� ? tip} 7' x r r 't,'a' -, E ;r:�s- r, e' xr^�.^5- :.t .�`:. ,r�s'!c:. � e ar : r ziitx"� �: ,� x,�_ drt' - •« .�. .Ig,.3'ksa" �. rr' tt kx '�' �-' i J.t.:ajt.C` v, 3 "MOM '-, o tyOE -w . ] t i'T Il lC�,..�'^v'+�y st•s , ,.'A" .t F"�• h*`.� i �� 5 '_ ',, Z.,y c --r §~as sa- x a rr'i Vit: 1 .ti qt 'tyL '-'.S �- .: 5 +.a 1 :'.Y:�� . :^., i.�, ''�' '"iL'yr`z"�^:.s. "'� r.��'f. -•+'. t .��-%.,-k�ai$r�y°y, �':S,:.Ft _�.,itr X �.�„ .,µ :tet 5 � wr � �« �, �'� � . "f,y ;;-.x .,•' -. {:-. `�`-t':;�.. `�•c 4 v �,. .a'� ,g's3.,`lt-x'-`"t.-, `3''+' '�' a�P�`re�.� --�'�"�s b � ,� x" �,,. r ,�"jr.L ,• � v ! -k h a S `:w' -,�. i d- •'t+� ' •ip '.'� % r' "�S t -. ? L' s +-+'Cz. X -,y k +�.` � f..m '� xE':. c,. S,a �.,.,.M'" - - .�, .. ... $ ... „ �:.�. - ro_. _ .:E .,.._ ��}'+,��,�3_., � .- �. ;�..e ..._ `� t: , t � .,....-�_...... ,.,'L;'?"+: �...�. . rz. r. j,�i;, $.- "� •� * r_.'"-�•r,`'_� ... zF. -a . ^r.'�'s' .." > .. �'4.sY � x *Z ' 3 .: _.. _ . t . e :�. 3 '':..s -'s Etii.:. ..§, r - -..r- ry .i4 -..: ?-"_,y�-E,,,�-.','e '3� •k - " -urc T '�w"v' ,; s';:- 4Y s,`-r......��,5a ,'7'cd� -aa c+a. 3; t `•v: Sr. ✓- "�r�. ;'S � �- � �„reu W;�t�,sc.,-..;'�-h'H- - t,as:+� '-�� n 5 -:! .. _ .� • . -, N60.. +r+,... p, �' �, :. s° '�: a a• ��, ,� r � .. �-4�r��'' � �, , „��rF ,-" ��k,a �s.x t. ?h � � a...�.-rr e bn '' ' k � . / ' ✓ '�+y •4 § �"'�"za�. ray ..� } ..+: '„` �F: " t •�"`:�. � `�, r � 4 wo �:<y z�r; s..c,tri.•�t•, a,t •u^` t,Tt"v.r 1 _�',+s'},t`'�.,..'•"-' .Yrn..;•:n t s' Se # t�"s4 ry x.:u"5c -Ipx� ,. -�,'F' 1,•. -;s: s •s .,t: A'TG� yr., .w. h 9' +ts' ti - x�e.'f+-.r d t° i t ,,,r n'"' �:±lAic £•• s s F-t.C`;�.�•'s ,R•s k�"-.a-tea `+'"3;.. ra`. ,ts.'yF•s `moi-.- -••W",y{k.�.tr3s:"' 1 s „y 't,'` d_n"` �'i ? y' y s+..ena�:a cE.r.. A. 'w•s't'�'"'+„;. �„C .F>.. u:d' r. +s. �' .;4 _71 .44 a In. r°•.t..' .".. •°rM-*, .r »•Sti�.T? -.F't •a�.-_r t .;; k w �'• - , ,t; 'f. ' � '. t .::'sal m-rC' ''w sw �. , y 6 ?':, +;2%• `• „�, w `: 5 ..-"x• .c,, h - 4s.} t "c r ^'. S, _.--a5 _'stS �-^' °' Y {i "`!' '",." _ ?rrust.'t �'-+.`„ :as. •y - "�'' ,'s. - " r''S. ,�' '+�ys -: ,,, r} �-•Y w.. '�'� ''�" •&""__ :Y 'Uy�",�,G. �,s �a- ts`�"`n_`-u�+ �n_,,.c.X-t [ v.. --'L '� t - �r .+..: `;=2*'Yj''"r+'rr r.'a` r � o c:'�. 3 T, � ... ,,,. c :,.s="'-a.',t` h— e ;.K'.., 'mak ;tr..�, ...?•:t`'•._. ,;�"ti+-" ''�:. r^.76• f+o� �i ; .rte aw;y �'x. ¢'�7 Y�. .a 'e /.,.[,�._.jr ;. 44,5 SF+:rsf' :.. �Y :,y:�,,�.y°+ s''+•,'zt, %^ 5 Ts r24 '•, 'ak '�'f` "^ e.�..;: g^ t. ks` r R. C. F `et. .l *,t 4. �, -. r t*,-,C...'t.:=.x-..r2 .''mow .,. �; s+ty, ^„�-4p,,,'C„s •+`s •�s' vF. t `'E ss, s-`+ ."'r`"r;'"'+ L e'i y r r. "b - ,� ” �.�1`eY,t",�e'ta.'•� i? ;.n .:.+?'>k� :.N ar..t?*s' �+'t' �'S- < �`.,�e�t*%� Y' . k..:•a .,3„i i'.a' his Jw' a.+n�,"'. aW - .$. n ,b,�; ,�, c;+raR d'.,+ as .t. s''r:le 'h` ',.`t.. - t.N �€.>:..^`rer d,� ei° ,, 4 :: +. $cr• .5 MR.r. pi'.ri".,,..�.� r s:'�; _ - r aV x;. •F+'.`., : ".u:- ss a•” y:. r c •i- t.: a .ti2.::t; ; }. .'.::d a< xc•Y. ax.. t w . .7. x 5*5 4'�., rt s«-«7 syu.,'4 ry# q{ 1 R^` _ .i. -'- � . � .. � ^�. , :a, { ` 4 •r4"� � � �mr; "µ :. x ,. 7 •..z.,'" .; � �., :rte � .. �. x„�+ 'f - ;�.�r,++n ,Y. '� , Y..Y �-•.^t�: ^x +. � �2 �.s'�-;..:: �• ..F�. �,�•F.. `� c, -E` yrk _:�,.-�"` o _�,•.+� 3.x '2i',��h...� i,r,�,.�.-,....r . ^sr yy,�"€ ;�� r;,�•�.�'''�'t�.z.h '.�u'+t Win.,. r� .,+;� 'k �rc,..r �.., i �, s Y- i.. .- :. .:- a .. •�._ h,. r # ».: �ihn � :_ � M t;.. r 'vve -i: }rte '„r,�r3-..-3'• K'�..ra-K.�` ...; ,�. �S ti r.... a* ''?,sz.;, YR 5 .E s .: > �. c' ? - f � h +! »�4. "ti f3 `t 'rte � :`�• x x t*7.. `y .� z- p'2 k,. +'�x3� �' ti^i F .a � � ! x: 3 - J'.vt t, ,r @ 'flY S'•sg.� k a.� t^'�A d -�.' t” ,' •. d^-,;, _ S, at d � 3a #r�'F. � ;�r�,'7�ys `+x 3T'� �: �,,,ce,,,,fi s7 rr a . " i �5 =:r x"{. 1+yrs '* x � r: >o:...ra4 �y+3! r a Y ae^st s - -z ,..r' r g 3, •x,''.* .�- arc -.'ro. 0 FINDINGS III were on a similar horizontal level, but were marked by slight color gradation; cultural level III 77-99 cmbd; asample was taken between 77-78 cmbd; cultural level IV -A 99-107 cmbd; sample taken at 102-104 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); silt; dark reddish brown (SYR 3/3 dry) weak, very fine granular structure; soft, veryfriable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; cultural level IV -B 99-107 cmbd; cultural level V 107-134 cmbd; sample taken at 110.112 cmbd; verydusky red (2.5YR2.5/2 moist); silt; reddish brown (5YR 4/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; cultural level VI 134138 cmbd; pale white -brown and sterile Burial Fill: 125-130 cmbd dark reddish brown (SYR 3/2 moist); silt; darkbrown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic Site 16116, Feature F, TU -3 This feature is an Ir shaped modified outcrop with the long axis running roughly east -west. It is modified along its entire length by a variety of methods, including large aligned boulders paralleling the outcrop; large cobbles stacked 34 courses high against the outcrop to form a unifacial wall; and a large mound ofboulders and cobbles piled along and in front of the outcrop. TU -3 is a 1.0 by 1.0 in unit placed at the west end of Feature F between the end of the feature and a piled alignment of boulders running north -south. The test unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description I 51-80 cmbd; this was the body of the modified outcrop, consisting of piled basalt cobbles and boulders which adjoin the outcrop II 80-100 cmbd; an arra at the top of the layer (80 cmbd) was sampled: reddish black (10YR 2/2.5/ 1 moist); silt; dark reddish brown (SYR 3/3 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, non sticky, non plastic; cultural level w Site 16116, Feature F, TU4 21 This Test Unit (1.0 sq m) was also placed within the confines of the modified outcrop above (Feature F). The excavation was placed approximately 1.0 in northeast of TU -3 (above), in a modified section of bedrock outcrop, to determine the presence or absence of human remains. The excavation was terminated when bedrock was encountered in all quadrants. The test unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description I 39-83 cmbd; consists of basalt small boulders and small to large cobbles. Some of these appear to be placed to fill cracks and some may have been in situ decomposing bedrock II 74-96 cmbd; bulk soil sample taken between 86-88 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); silt; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; probable non- cultural layer Site 16116, Feature B, TU -5 Feature B is a mound built of basalt pieces ranging from small -cobble to medium-bouldersize, built against the sideof a bedrock outcrop. Abasalt upright (c.0.60mhigh) found on the northern portion of the mound indicated the possible presence of a human burial. TU -5, a 1.0 by 1.0 in unit established c. 0.20 in south of this upright, failed to disclose either an opening in the bedrock face or a burial within the mound. Site 16116, Feature G, TU -6 (Figure 9) Feature G is another mound, and consists of a northeast - southwest pile built atop a low bedrockoutcrop. The eastside of the mound is piled 1-2 courses high, whereas the west end is 3-5 courses high. TU -6 is a 1.0 by 1.0 excavation placed inthe middle of the mound. Excavationof thisunit also failed to reveal a cave/tube or burial retrains, and was discontinued upon encountering bedrock at c. 0.23 in below surface. Stratigraphy of the unit disclosed: Layer Description I 61-93 cmbd; consists of small to large cobbles piled atop and between two small boulders; cultural layer Ll FINDINGS II 93-116 cmbd; sampledbetween 110-115 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2S/2 moist); silt; dark brown (7-5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, non -plastic; cultural layer Site 16116, Feature A, TU -7 FeatureA is a veryrough encicsm consisting of corrected mounds on the south and southwest and a rough piling or paving on the north that terminates in a wall alignment that extends north. Construction consists of mound and alignments of unshaped pahoehoe (large -cobble to medium -boulder size) roughly piled in the project area. Portions of Feature A, Feature B, and a small portion of Feature C were carefully recorded to provide an example of the ubiquitous agriculture features in the project area. Feature A appears to have been constructed both around the bedrockareas and onthe surface. TU -7 (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed at the northern base at the southwest comer of Feature A, and a Veneridae shell was located on the surface near the southwest corner. The unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description ' Feature H at Site 16116 is a mound found at the east end of the site very near the proposed Alii Drive realignment right -of --way. This mound is approximately 3.0 by 2.5 by ' 0.50 in and was suspected as a burial feature. The feature is composed of stacked and piled unshaped pahoehoeboulders, a 1.0 by 1.0 m excavation was placed in the center. All cobbles were removed from the unit, and the underlying soil (c. 0.05 crit thick) was removed, but no cavities or burials were revealed. Bedrock was encountered immediately below the soil and excavation ceased. ' Layer Description I 23-100 cmbd; sample taken at 100 cmbd; very dark brown (10YR 2/2 moist); silt; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/3 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, non -plastic; possible cultural layer Site 16117, Feature A, 1U-1 23 Site 16117 is a medium-sized habitation or agricultural platform with a small cupboard and planting box within. It is constructed of small -to -medium basalt boulders piled randomly across a bedtockoutcrop. In order to determine the presence or absence of human remains, TU -1(1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed at the north end of the feature in an oval, roughly flat, faced mound of small boulders set against a low outcrop. The unit was dug to bedrock, and it appeared that the placed stone served agriculturulpurposes. Thefollowingstratigraphy was noted. Layer Description 30-75 cmbd; consisted of small to medium basalt sub -angular boulders and small to large cobbles. No midden or artifacts were noted within these placed stones 11 75-100 cmbd; sample taken from 75-80 cmbd; verydusky red UOR25/2 moist); silt; darkbrown (7-5YR 3/4 dry); structureless; loose, veryfriable, iron -sticky, iron -plastic; cultural level Site 16133, Feature C, TU -1 Site 16133 is a probable pre -contact agricultural site composed of three features. Feature A is a modified outcrop, Features B and C are terraces. TU-1(1.0by 1.0m) was placed in the east half of Feature C, a modified outcrop/terrace with some minimal facing. Feature C extends off of a bedrock outcrop that lies to the east and is of stacked basalt cobbles 3-4 causes high and roughly paved on top. The following stratigraphy was revealed: Layer Description 21-30cmbd; consistsofunshapedbasaltcobbles and small boulders; one waterwom basalt was observed H 30-69 cmbd; bulk soil sample taken from 55 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); _ silt loam; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granularstmcture; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, not -plastic; does not appear to be a cultural layer I 48-50 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 ' moist); silt; darkreddish brown (SYR 3/3 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; cultural ' layer ' II 55-57cnbd;darkreddishbrown(5YR3/2moist); silt; dark brown (75YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; non -cultural layer Site 16116, Feature H, TU -8 ' Feature H at Site 16116 is a mound found at the east end of the site very near the proposed Alii Drive realignment right -of --way. This mound is approximately 3.0 by 2.5 by ' 0.50 in and was suspected as a burial feature. The feature is composed of stacked and piled unshaped pahoehoeboulders, a 1.0 by 1.0 m excavation was placed in the center. All cobbles were removed from the unit, and the underlying soil (c. 0.05 crit thick) was removed, but no cavities or burials were revealed. Bedrock was encountered immediately below the soil and excavation ceased. ' Layer Description I 23-100 cmbd; sample taken at 100 cmbd; very dark brown (10YR 2/2 moist); silt; dark reddish brown (5YR 3/3 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; soft, very friable, slightly sticky, non -plastic; possible cultural layer Site 16117, Feature A, 1U-1 23 Site 16117 is a medium-sized habitation or agricultural platform with a small cupboard and planting box within. It is constructed of small -to -medium basalt boulders piled randomly across a bedtockoutcrop. In order to determine the presence or absence of human remains, TU -1(1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed at the north end of the feature in an oval, roughly flat, faced mound of small boulders set against a low outcrop. The unit was dug to bedrock, and it appeared that the placed stone served agriculturulpurposes. Thefollowingstratigraphy was noted. Layer Description 30-75 cmbd; consisted of small to medium basalt sub -angular boulders and small to large cobbles. No midden or artifacts were noted within these placed stones 11 75-100 cmbd; sample taken from 75-80 cmbd; verydusky red UOR25/2 moist); silt; darkbrown (7-5YR 3/4 dry); structureless; loose, veryfriable, iron -sticky, iron -plastic; cultural level Site 16133, Feature C, TU -1 Site 16133 is a probable pre -contact agricultural site composed of three features. Feature A is a modified outcrop, Features B and C are terraces. TU-1(1.0by 1.0m) was placed in the east half of Feature C, a modified outcrop/terrace with some minimal facing. Feature C extends off of a bedrock outcrop that lies to the east and is of stacked basalt cobbles 3-4 causes high and roughly paved on top. The following stratigraphy was revealed: Layer Description 21-30cmbd; consistsofunshapedbasaltcobbles and small boulders; one waterwom basalt was observed H 30-69 cmbd; bulk soil sample taken from 55 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); _ silt loam; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granularstmcture; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, not -plastic; does not appear to be a cultural layer 1W FINDINGS Site 16133, Feature B, TU -2 Feature Bat Site 16133 is a terrace extending from alow and wide bedrock knob to the south. The body of the terrace is piled and the edges are roughly stacked. TU -2 (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed on the central north side and dug to c. 0.90 in below datum. Excavation was terminated when bedrock was encamtaed. Cultural material was not observed. TU -2 displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 29-67crnbd,layercorsisredofoobNes andbmkias of basalt No cultural material was observed II 67-92 cmbd; soil sample obtained at 84cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); silt; dark brown (7.SYR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; noncultural Site 6337, Feature D, TU -3 Feature B is a prehistoric terrace in fair condition. TU - 3 (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed in the northwest comer in what appeared tobea slab-linedhearth. It was hoped that a sample for radiometric dating could be obtained. The placed stones consist of an upright slab at the south, two slabs on the north and small boulders at the east and west. The south half (1.0 by 0.50 m) was removed. Sparse marine shell midden and charcoal were encountered and collected. Also noted was a single volcanic glass shatter, coral fragments, and both fish and mammal bone. The unit was very rocky inside and did not appear to contain ash. A small amount of charcoal was recovered from the excavation. It appears that the archaeological feature was constructed on the surface, and testing on the unit ceased when bedrock was encountered. TU -3 displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 19-36 cmbd; consists of placed small to large basalt cobbles on the interior of the placed upright slabs and boulders; coral fragments were noted in this cultural layer II 22-50 cmbd; soil sample taken from 22-25 cmbd; reddish black (SYR 2-5/1 moist); silt; dark brown (7SYR 3/2 dry); structtaeless; loose, veryfriable,non-sdcky,non-plastic; cultural layer • III 29-64 cmbd; soil sample taken from 50-55 cmbd; reddish black (10R 2.5/1 moist); silt loam; very dark brown (10YR 2/2 dry); structureless; loose, very friable, non -sticky, non -plastic; cultural layer IV 6473 cmbd; soil sample taken from 65-70 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/2 moist); silt; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); stmctureless; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; non -cultural layer Site 6337, Feature C, TU -2 24 Site 6337 was initially recorded by Ching et al. (1973), but new features were identified in the area (and assigned to the site) by Hommon and Rosendahl (1983). These features were designated Sites 6337b (habitation terrace), 6337c (possible burial platform) and 6316 (possible burial platform) (Walker and Rosendahl 1985a). Site 6316 wasmistumbered by Walker and Rosendahl (1985a), and was subsequently given the designation of Site 1001-5 (Walker 1991), and Site 6337d (Dunn and Rosendahl 1991). Feature C is a small platform found very near the proposed Alii Drive Realignment right-of-way, in the northeastem portion of the project area. Itis stacked and faced on the south and east sides, and collapsed on the west. TU -2 (1.0 by 1.0 m) was placed in the center of the platform to determine if human remains were present. After excavation, it was revealed that three pieces of historic glass, but no human remains, midden, charcoal, total fragments, or waterworn stones were located. Excavation stopped in the test unit when bedrock was reached. The unit displayed the following stratigraphy: Layer Description 27-151 cmbd; consists of placed basalt small boulders and small to large cobbles as platform fill; three pieces of historic glass were rioted during excavation; cultural level II 151-155 cmbd; dark reddish brown (5YR 2.5/ 2 moist); silt loam; dark brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); weak, very fine granular structure; loose, very friable, slightly sticky, nonplastic; non- cultural layer • ' FINDINGS ' Site 6337, Feature B, TU -1 Layer Description Feature D at Site 6337 is a large, well built platform I 0.02-135 cmbd; unshaped small -to -large constructed of large basalt cobbles and small -to -medium basalt cobbles and small to medium boulders of unshaped pahoehoe. The wall on the south is well- boulders; sparse water -worn coral present; ' faced and stacked six to seven courses high. The east wall is cultural layer of similar construction, while the north and west walls are lower and partially collapsed. There is a small hole in the 11 135-137 cmbd; organic duff layer, very sparse northeast wall; the top slopes gently mauka and there appears coral; cultural layer ' to be a rough attempt at paving. TU -1 is a 2.0 by 1.0 m excavation placed in the southern portion of the feature. III 137-194 cmbd; soil sample taken at 150 cmbd; Excavation progressed to almost 2.0 m below the top of the very dusky red (2.5YR 2.512 moist); silt; dark structure until the unit reached decomposing bedrock. Very brown (7.5YR 3/4 dry); structureless; loose, sparse waterworn coral and basalt were encountered, but no very friable, slightly sticky, slightly plastic; human remains were found. Stratigraphy in the test unit was cultural layer as follows: I 11 IJ I 25 0 26 AGE DETERMINATIONS Objectives and Methods The purpose of age determination analysis is to provide initial chronological data to aid in assessing the relative significance of sites in a project area. Seven samples of charcoal were chosen from discrete cultural deposits within Sites 6337, 16114, 16115 and 16116 for age determination using radiocarbon analysis. Samples were selected based on the amount and nature of the datable material present, stratigraphic context, and overall distribution within the project area. The samples were submitted for radiocarbon analysis to Beta Analytic Inc. of Coral Gables, Florida. Using standard procedures, the samples were pretreated with an acid, alkali, acid series of soakings to remove carbonates and humic acids. After pretreatment, samples were combusted to form carbon dioxide gas, combined with lithium to separate the carbon, and hydrolized for conversion to liquid form. The liquid was then catalyzed to form benzene and placed in a liquid scintillation counter to determine the amounts of carbon -13 and carbon -12. The isotope values obtained during the counting process were then used to calculate the carbon-13/carbon-12 ratio for each sample, with the final result being determined relative to international standards in order to reduce errors produced by carbon isotope fractionation. Processing of the seven samples proceeded normally. Results The results of the radiocarbon age determination are summarized in Table 5. The age for each sample is reported as a range corresponding to the calendric age */- two standard deviations. Ages were calibrated using the tables provided in Stuiver and Pearson (1986), which correct for variations in atmospheric carbon over time. According to Table 5, samples RC -12446,-1245,-1248, and -1247 yielded definitive age ranges after cahbtation, while samples RC -1249, -1244 and RC -1243 produced multiple age ranges. Multiple ranges are caused by "flat" regions in the calibration curve, which correspond to periods when atmospheric carbon decreased at a rate greater than 1.2 ppm/10 years, resulting in more than one possible fit of a sample to the calibration curve. While multiple age ranges are more difficult to interpret archaeologically, detailed examination of the statistical curves, combined with evidence from feature stratigraphy, generally provides a means of selecting one age range as more probable than the others. Based on these criteria, the most likely age ranges forsamples RC -1249, -1244 and -1243 are AD 1620-1955, AD 1470- 1690 and AD 1790-1950, respectively. The results of the age determination analysis span a 1,275 -year period extending from AD 680 to the present (present - AD 1955). Within this period, the results from speck features can be grouped into three clusters. The fust cluster consists of those samples with clearly prehistoric age ranges (680-1790 AD) and includes samples RC -1246 from Feature D, and RC -1245 from Feature B- of Site 6337, RC - 1244 from Feature A of Site 16115, and RC -1248 from Feature E, and RC -1247 from Feature G of Site 16116. The age ranges yielded by the samples are consistent with known stratigraphic relationships and artifact data, and do not appear to be affected by contamination or disturbance. One sample (RC -1249 from Feature A of Site 16114) represents the second cluster, whose dates span the late prehistoric andhistoric periods (AD 1620-1950). Examination of the probability statistics, stratigraphic relationships and artifact associations for the sample indicates that there is a slightly higher probability (greater than 53 %) that the sample is historic in age; and has an age range of AD 1800-1950. The third cluster (with a clearly historic age range [AD 1790- 1950]) is represented by sample RC -1243 from Feature D of Site 16116. Based on the results of the age determination analysis, initial occupation of the project area occurred during the prehistoric period, and may have begun as early as AD 680 at Feature B of Site 6337 and AD 1000 at Feature Dof the same site. These two features, identified as a platform and a terrace, respectively, are interpreted as having temporary/semi- permanent habitation functions. The second phase of prehistoric occupation occurred between AD 1410 and 1690 at Feature A (terrace) of Site 16115, and Features E (platform) and G (mound) of Site 16116. Feature A of Site 16115 and Feature G are interpreted as agricultural in function, while Feature E of Site 16116 is interpreted as a burial. The correlation of age determination results and site/feature data thus suggests that initial use of the project area was primarily focused on temporary/semi-permanent habitation, but expanded in the 15th century to include agricultural andburial activities. Evidence for late prehistoric/early historic period occupation is derived from Feature A (terrace) of Site 16114 andFeatureD (platform)of Site 16116.FeatureAisinterpreted' • DATA ANALYSES Table 5. SUMMARY OF RADIOCARBON AGE DETERMINATIONS PEW Lab. C-14 Age C-13/ C-13 Adjusted *Calendric LabNo. No. Provenience Yrs. BP C-12 C-14 Age Range RC- BETA- (one sigma) Ratio Yrs. BP Yrs. AD SITE 6337 TU -1, Layer I, 1246 49077 Fea. D 580± 120 -11.4 800± 120 1000-1400 TU -3, Layer II 22-50 cmbd 1245 49076 Fea. B 1000 ± 110 -19.4 1090 ± 110 680-1170 TU -1, Layer III 127 cmbd SITE 16114 1249 49080 Fea. A 50 ± 150 -24.0 70 ± 150 1516-1595 TU -1, Layer Il, 1620-1955 6490 cmbd SITE 16115 1244 49075 Fea. A 270 ± 60 -25.8 260 ± 60 1470-1690 TU -2A, Layer I 1736-1808 15-36 cmbd 1930-1954 SITE 16116 1243 49074 Fes. D 50 ± 70 -25.4 40 ± 70 1670-1780 TU -1, Layer I, 1790-1950 62-103 cmbd 1953-1955 1248 49079 Fea. E 230 ± 50 -19.6 340 ± 50 1440-1650 TU -2, Layers II -V, 74134 cmbd 1247 49078 Fea. G 420 ± 70 -26.0 400:t 70 1410-1650 TU -6, Layer II 93-116 cmbd Calibrated according to Stuiver and Pearson (1986); range at two sigmas 27 W DATA ANALYSES to have functioned as a habitation, while Feature D is interpreted as a burial. The range of activities represented in the late prehistoric/early historic period features thus appears to be consistent with those noted in the prehistoric period. PORTABLE ARTIFACTS A total of 23 artifacts were recovered from the project area, 20 of which were classified as indigenous artifacts. The remaining three artifacts are non -indigenous and will be discussed in a later section. Indigenous artifacts are those fabricated using traditional Hawaiian manufacturing techniques and local raw materials, and they range in type from fishing gear and tools to various decorative items.The inventory of indigenous artifacts from the current project area is fairly narrow in content, consisting of fishing gear, tools, and flaked stone artifacts. A detailed tabulation of indigenous artifacts by deposit -area is presented in Table 6. The results of the artifactual analysis are discussed below. Fishing Gear One specimen of indigenous fishing gear was recovered from the project area during the current investigation. The artifact, a shaped tab, derives from Feature A of Site 16114. Fishhook tabs are preforms forfishhooks, and are categorized according to theirmanufacturing stage, following terminology outlined by Sinoto (1975). Roughed out tabs represent the first stage, in which bone or shell material is cut to the appropriate size of the intended fishhook. Shaped tabs are the second stage; and are distinguished from roughed -out tabs by the refinement of their edges and initial shaping of the shank and bend portions of the fishhook Hook blanks are the last stage before actual finishing, whichinvolves the removal ofmaterial to form the inner edges of the hook that separate the point from the shank. The shaped tab encountered in the current project area is manufactured from Isognomonidae, and measures c. 18.0 mm by 5.0 mm by 4.0 mm. It has been cut and abraded on foursides to form a rectangle, but is otherwise unmodified. Tools Three tools, all abraders, were encountered in the project area during the current investigation The assemblage derives from Feature A of Site 16114 and Feature D of Site 16115. The tools are described below. Of the three abraders, one was manufactured from coral, one from basalt, and one from an echinoid spine. Coral and basalt abraders are evaluated according to their overall shape in plan view, following the classification system and W 28 nomenclature set forth by Suggs (1961) to describe coral abraders found atNukuHiva inthe Marquesas Islands, French Polynesia. in this system, abraders areeither infomtal,meaning that the shape of the raw material is dominant; or formal, indicating that the characteristics of the raw material have been extensively modified by use. Cross-sections are generally taken perpendicular to the tip and butt of the abrader, while the number of abrasion faces is indicative of preferential abrasion on a given surface. Echinoid spine abradets, which tend to be unifomrly informal in shape, are evaluated based on the number, location, and type of abrasion faces present, using a system developed by PHiRI. The coral abrader is a fragment of a formal abrader and measures c. 23.0 mm by 13.0 mm by 6.0 mm. It is abraded on two faces, creating a lenticular -oval cross-section and a wedged plan view. The basalt abrader is a fragment of an informal abrader and measures c. 88.0 mm by 73.0 mm by 23.0 mm. It is abraded on one face and has a convex lateral cross-section. The plan view shape of the specimen in is indeterminate. The remaining abrader is manufactured from an echinoid spine. It is a complete informal abrader with a single face of abrasion The abrasion face extends from the midsection to the distal end and is beveled. The specimen measures c. 31.0 mm by 5.0 mm by 4.0 mm. Coral artifacts apparently served multiple purposes prehistorically, ranging from "rubbers" used to finish canoes and wooden bowls (Buck 1964:257-8) to saws orfiles used in the manufacture of bone and shell fishhooks (Emory, Bonk, and Sinoto 1968; Sugg 1961). Use of a particular surface over a period of time might generate a sawing or filing edge, which in turn would wear down during use to a new shape which could serve a new purpose. Echinoid abraders, in contrast, were most likely used for more specialized tasks such as fishhook manufacture, as they are both smaller and softer tools. Flaked Stone Sixteen of the indigenous artifacts recovered from the project area are flaked stone artifacts. Of this assemblage, seven specimens are composed of aphanitic basalt, and nine are composed of volcanic glass. By provenience, the flaked stone artifacts derive from Sites 6337, 16114, and 16115. All flaked stone material is evaluated with respect to flake/core type. Following established procedures for evaluating flaked stonermterial, diagnostic flakes are defined as those flakes having a complete or parttaLstriking platfortn • 0 DATA ANALYSES 29 Table 6. DETAILED DISTRIBUTION OF PORTABLE ARTIFACTS 6337 16114 16115 CATEGORY Fea.D FeaC Fea-A FeaA Fea.D Fea.E TU -3 TU -2 Site TU -1 Site TU -2A TU -1 Site Grand II I Total II III Total I Surf: I Total Total INDIGENOUS FISHING GEAR Shell Shaped tab 0 1 1 0 1 aha .'o FLAKED STONE Basalt Flake 0 5 - 5 2 2 7 Volcanic glass Core 0 2 - 2 0 2 Flake 1 1 4 - 4 2 2 7 �01- 3 t Rxii"^�w" ''ffP dr `ATR••F 112 r�^„i `j J�`m`�yy§` y "aef�cs. ;xi uPY�hM'dtw'... a:;:ax6a afrtpi��enar•'' TOOLS Abrader Basalt 0 - - 0 1 1 1 Coral - 0 2 - 2 0 2 Echinoid - 0 - 1 1 0 1 Ch1 ,�--'rY :YeFiumf'r�'i�jl*:.. 1 NON -INDIGENOUS DOMESTIC ITEMS Glass 3 3 0 0 3 Fragment m s= 0 DATA ANALYSES and a bulbofpercussion. Non-diagnostic flakes are fragments that lack the platform and/or bulb. Cores tend toward multifaceted polyhedral shapes dominated by one or more platforms, and typically show little evidence of subsequent use as tools. Primary cores exhibit only flake scars, while secondary cores are actually flakes with a bulb from which other flakes have beenremoved. Polished flakes are restricted to the basalt assemblage, and represent flakes that have one or morehighlypolished surfaces. Polished flakes are generally interpreted as deriving from flaking or retouch performed on polished stone tools such as adzes. Based on the above criteria, the 16 specimens can be separated as follows: one primary and one secondary flake core, eight diagnostic flakes, four non-diagnostic flakes, and two pieces of volcanic glass debitage. Two of the basalt flakes are polished. Cores - Cores are further described by the number and condition of platforms, the number and direction of flake scars, and the presence or absence of cortex. Both of the cores from the present project are manufactured from volcanic glass. The primary core has at least three platforms, all of which have been crushed, and four associated flake scars. It is polyhedral in shape and measures c. 19.0 mm by 11.0 mm by 7.0 num. The secondary core has a single intact platform with one associated flake scar. It is distally contracted in plan view and measures c. 17.0 mm by 11.0 mm by 3.0 mm. No cortex was noted on either core. Flakes- By composition, five of the diagnostic flakes are aphanitic basalt, while three of the diagnostic and four of the non-diagnostic flakes are volcanic glass. The diagnostic flakes range from c. 12.0 to 32.0 mm in length and c. 10.0 to 32.0 nun in width, and the nort-diagnostic flakes range from c. 13.0 to 26.0 mm in length and c. 10.0 to 34.0 mm in width. Flakes manufactured from aphanitic basalt are generally larger than those composed of volcanic glass, due to the relative flaking properties of the materials. Uses for flaked stone artifacts have been suggested both by Barrera (1971) and by Kirch (1973), who observed: The possible functions... are many and varied. Basaltic glass holds a fine, sharp edge and the tools make excellent cutting and scraping implements. They may have been used in food preparation, for cutting and scraping plant materials, or for delicate woodworking... [t]hese artifacts are extremely common, being found in virtually every type of [Hawaiian] site. The suggestion, then, is that the ubiquitous basaltic glass flakes functioned as a prehistoric "pocketknife-, to use a modern analogy... (1973: 185-6). 0 Non -indigenous Artifacts 30 Three glass fragments were encountered in the deposits of Feature C of Site 6337. The fragments are manufactured of clear glass, and include two non-diagnostic body fragments and one base fragment. The base fiagmenthasraised lettering on the exterior and a raised ring for a foot. Itmay be a portion of a bottle. None of the fragments exhibited attributes that could be used to date the fragments. Summary In general, the artifact assemblage encountered during the current investigation suggests that a fairly narrow range of prehistoric activities were carried out within the project area. With the exception of a few flaked stone artifacts and an abrader, the majority of the artifact assemblage derives ftom Site 16114; suggesting that a broader range of activities was undertaken at this locale compared to the other sites in the project area. Stone tool manufacture and use is suggested by the flaked stone assemblage, and may have been accompanied by food processing and craft -production activities that relied on the use of flaked stone tools. Manufacture of bone and shell artifacts is suggested by the presence of the shaped tab and abraders in the assemblage. The glass fragments noted in the deposits of Site 6337 are most likely the result of recent dumping in the area. 1/ 1 Objectives and Methods Midden deposits are archaeologically significant on a number of levels, as the variety and content of food remains contained within a given midden deposit provide useful informationcmceming prehistoric dietandresoutceutilization patterns. The analysis ofmiddenforinventorysurveypmjects has two primary objectives: 1. To determine midden content, in particular the , variety and distribution of the remains for each cultural deposit encountered within the project area; and , 2. To provide an indication of dietary and resource exploitation patterns for each site, and for the project area as a whole. , All midden remains recoveredfrom the various test units underwent detailed analysis inthelaboratory.Detailedanalysis ' involved splitting the sample into two size classes by passing each sample through 1/4 -in and 1/8 -in mesh screens. One iJ I I 1 I I 1 ! 0 DATA ANALYSES hundred percent of the material retained in the 1/4 -in screen is completely sorted to the lowest taxonomic level possible, while the material retained in the 1/8 -in screen is inspected both for artifactual material and for taxa not encountered in the larger portion of the sample. Marine shell identifications are verified and augmented using Kay (1979). The sampling design outlined above is adapted from Kirch (1979), based on a series of experiments measuring the relative distribution of molluscan and bone material retained on each screen. Kirch concluded that use of the screening process increased the speed of the sorting process without decreasing either the accuracy or statistical validity of the overall analysis. The taxonomic distribution and weight of materialretained on the 1/4 inscreen should thus be considered as representative of the variety and relative percentages of each taxon present in the entire sample. Results Midden remains were encountered in the deposits at twenty of the sites in the project area. The range of taxa present in the midden assemblage from these deposits is summarized in Table 7. Total weights for each taxon (in grams) are tabulated by site and feature, with subtotals indicating the combined weight per feature for each larger material class (eg. gastropods). The total weight of each taxon in the project area is provided in the final column of the table, while thegtand totalrepresents the combined weight of all the midden materials derived from the project area. In general, the taxa represented by the midden samples taken from the project area were common inhabitants of the shorelines, shallow -water areas, solutionbenches and fringing reefs of the windward islands of the Hawaiian chain By weight, 90.02% of the 213.95 gams of midden material 31 recovered from the project area was contributed by marine gastropods, 3.89% by bivalves, 6.09% by other invertebrates such as echinoids, crustaceans and non -marine gastropods, 0.1% by vertebrate faunal material, and 0.1% by vegetal material. Cypraeidae, Neritidae, Conidae and Thaididae are the most abundant marine gastropods by weight, while Isognomonidaeand Veneridaeare themostcommonbivalves. Echinoidea was the dominant taxon within the other invertebrates category. The vertebrate faunal material was composed of a fish and bird bone, while the vegetal material was represented by carbonized plant remains only. The midden assemblages, when examined by site and feature, are generally comparable in content and relative distribution to the project -area total discussed above. The deposits associated with Feature A of Site 16114 contained 91.9% marine gastropods,1.42% marine bivalves, 051 % other invertebrates, 0.1% vertebrate faunal material and 0.1 % vegetal material, and showed the same taxonornic concentrations within each category noted for the project area above. The deposits associated with Feature A of Site 16115 were composed entirely of marine gastropods, while the Feature E deposits contained 69.3% marine gastropods, and 32.1% marine bivalves. Cyproeidae contributed the largest amount by weight to the Feature A deposits, and Thaididae contributed the largest amount to the Feature E deposits at Site 16115. The resul is of the midden analysis indicate that subsistence patterns in the project area included the collection and consumption of a variety of shell fish, ranging from several taxa of marine gastropods and bivalves to echinoids and crustaceans. The relative lack of vertebrate faunal material, vegetal remains and non -marine gastropods inthe site deposits may indicate that terrestrial resources were infrequently utilized within the project area,butmay alsoreflectdiffetential preservation of these remains. 0 0 DATA ANALYSES Table 7. DETAILED DISTRIBUTION OF MIDDEN 16114 16115 fe-a.A Fes.A Fea.E Material TU -1 Site TU -2A TU -1 Site Grand H III Total I I Total Total MOLLUSCA ISOGNOMONIDAE GASTROPODA - 2.59 0.00 2.59 VENERII)AE 0.18 TROCFEDAE 0.00 0.18 Trochus intextus 0.20 - 0.20 - 0.00 0.20 NERITIDAE OTHER INVERTEBRATES Nerita Picea 17.66 1.15 18.81 0.12 0.12 18.93 LITTORINIDAE - 0.00 12.19 CRUSTACEA 0.81 - 0.91 Littorina pintado 0.69 - 0.69 - 0.00 0.69 CyPRAErDAE 121.00 2.65 123.65 0.69 2.59 3.28 126.93 THAIDIDAE 10.54 - 10.54 - 6.03 6.03 16.57 CONIDAE 14.16 - 14.16 - 3.10 3.10 17.26 UNIDENTIFIED GASTROPODA 11.63 - 11.63 - - 0.00 11.63 BIVALVIA ISOGNOMONIDAE 2.59 - 2.59 0.00 2.59 VENERII)AE 0.18 - 0.18 0.00 0.18 0042 554 ` 554 83 (JBTOTAL'BIVALVLk 2. 7 7 0. 0W 2.77,,,, OTHER INVERTEBRATES ECIIINOIDEA 11.73 0.46 12.19 - 0.00 12.19 CRUSTACEA 0.81 - 0.91 - 0.00 0.81 OTHER 12 54 0.46 13 oo , vv[IBTOTAT 0 06 A VERTEBRATES Bone 0.20 0.20 - 0.00 0.20 VEGETAL Charcoal 0.23 0.23 - 0.00 0.23 17 u- -18. 32 E 33 EVALUATION OF SURVEYMETHODOLOGY In general terms, the survey methodology was effective. Access to all portions of the project area was quite good. The density of vegetation in the project area often hampered observations, but spacing between transects averaged five to seven meters, so that all major archaeological features were located. Somesmallerarchaeological features (e.g. agricultural features such as small mounds and terraces) were identified, but not formally designated. DISCUSSION Fourteen sites (more than 36 component features) were identified in the project area. Three of these had been previously identified, but may be affected by the proposed development (6335, 6336, and 6337). Three of the five features from Site 6337 were tested for human remains. Feature A of Site 6337 lies outside the project area, and Feature E is a wall. Sites 6335 and 6336 are historic cattle walls. Formal Feature Types Formal feature types at sites in the project area included: wall, enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well. These features are common types in both the North Kona District and on the Island of Hawaii. Three of the sites (16113, 16114, and 16115) were [narked in the field with yellow flagging tape marked "CSH." These sites were recorded during the current survey, since it was not known if they had been recorded by CSH. Sites N and O (Soehren 197 8) are thought to have been located during the current project. Site N could be Site 16114; Soehren's (1978) data is sketchy, but the presence of cowry and Nerita sp. shells at the feature may conform with Soehren's findings. It is also possible that Site 16115 (also tagged in the field as CSH 29 [Cultural Surveys Hawaii]), may be Site O, since it is in the location indicated by Soehren (1978). Sites 1001-1 to 1001-5 (Walker 1991) were also relocated. Site 1001-1 was designated as Site 16112, and Site 1001-2 possibly as Site No. 16115. Walker's (1991) Site 1001-3 was assigned Site No. 16118. His Site 1001-4 consisted of three cairns. While these, themselves, were not formally designated, it is believed that they form part of the agricultural system "carpet" present within the project area. Site 1001-5 is thought to be Feature D of Site 6337 and was recorded as such. Terraces - Only a sample of the terraces (N=9) were examined within the project area because they are so widespread within the Kona Field System. These features are raised above the ground on one to three sides to provide a partially level surface on sloping or irregular ground. Of the nine that were recorded, three (33%) may be habitation terraces or paepae (sleeping houses), with the remaining six (66%) appearing to be agricultural, or retaining, terraces. Possible habitation terraces include those at 6337(D),, 16114, and 16119. The latter agricultural -terrace grouping is a common component throughout the project area, and the Kona Field System as well. These agricultural features are thought to occur at Sites 15108, 16115 (A, B, D), and 16113 (B, C). Enclosures - These are the second most -common feature type (ns7) among the recorded features at the Alii Drive Parcels Project Area. Two different types of enclosures were located within the project area. The fust type, a high -walled animal enclosure, was associated with the historic agricultural Site 16111, where three features were located. The remaining three enclosures, at Sites 16113, 16115, and 16118, appear to be associated with habitation. The remaining enclosure feature is at the Site 16116 agricultural complex and this large amorphous feature is thought to be associated with agricultural activities. Platforms - Platforms constitute five of the recorded features at the project area, and all appear to be of Late Prehistoric or Contact -era age. These five features were or _ located at Site 6337 (Features C and B), at Site 16116 (Features D and E) and at Site 16117. The features at Site 6337 were tested to determine the presence or absence of human remains. None was found. Features D and E at Site 16116 were tested, and the presence of human remains was conf rived. The final platform at Site 16117 also resembles a modified outcrop. It was probably used for habitation or agriculture. Mounds - Mounds (N=5) in this project area are well- builtfeatures constructed of pahoehoe. One of these is located at Site 16114, and the remainder are found in conjunction with Site 16115. As with the terrace feature -type, these are common in the Kona Field System, and in the project area, so most were not recorded. Itis probable thatmost of the mounds (including the named features) served an agricultural purpose. rA CONCLUSION Concrete structures - These features (n=2) are historic or recent concrete troughs used for animal husbandry at Site 16111. These two features, which seem to have been built on site, appear to have provided water for domestic stock from the well at Feature C. Walls - Four walls were recorded in the project area. Three of them (Sites 6336, and Feature E at Site 6337) were recorded during Ching et al. (1973) project. These two appear historic and may be associated with agriculture at Site 16111. All walls are well made and appear to have been maintained recently. The wall found at Site 16112, judging from its construction, appears to be Late Prehistoric or Contact -era. Prehistoric and historic walls are common feature types in the general vicinity, and the above examples are typical. C -shape - A single, rough C -shape was noted at Site 16113. This feature may have provided shelter for those involved with agriculture in the surrounding field system. Modified outcrop - Two modified outcrops were recorded during the inventory survey, one at Site 16113 and one at 16116. Both appear to be associated with agriculture. The features were not tested, but appear to be consistent with other agricultural features in the area. Well - One water well was identified. It was located at Site 16111 and consisted of an excavation dug or blasted into pahoehoe, a concrete and basalt "apron," a windmill tower, and an engine shed. Also associated with the agricultural complex at Site 16111 is a previously recorded historic wall (Feature E at Site 6337) extending to the east. Functional Interpretations All project area sites have been tentatively classified as one of the following functional types: habitation, agriculture, agriculture/possible habitation, indeterminate, possible boundary, habitation/agriculture, and burial. Based on the parameters advanced in Cordy (1981:59 [Table 8]) all habitation sites in the project area appear to be temporary in nature, except the historic sites. These sites fit Cordy's criteria for temporary habitation, although none of the features contained evidence of multiple firepits. According to Cordy's model, temporary habitations are (a) less than 16 square meters in external area, (b) insubstantial constructions, (c) contain multiple firepits (these would most likely exist in caves or rock shelters), and (d) have few to no associated structures. None of the sites appeared to be permanent habitations based on Cordy's criteria for permanent habitation (1981:66-82). Cordy presents the following criteria for permanent habitations: (a) external area greater than 16-19 sq in; (b) substantial construction (stone -filled and bif iced walls); (c) presence of special purpose structures (small, special purpose structures for work and storage); and (d) location (permanent housing tends to cluster mostly on the coast, either along the shore or at the mouth of and on the sides of valley floors). Most of the features in the current project area are precontact and were for agriculture. This was not unexpected since the project area is within the Kona Field System, of which the predominant features are parallel stone walls eight to fifteen meters apart, 34 and which demarcate cultivated fields. Within the former fieldsarevariousminoragriculunvifeabm!s includingt=ces and mounds, as well as scattered residential features, including terraces and temples (Kirch 1985:167). Site 15108 is one ofmanyprehistoricagriculturalterraces in the project area. It is unclear how these terraces functioned within the agricultural complex, but probably crops were raised in the soil they retained. The site was not tested Site 16111 is late historic/recent agricultural (animal husbandry) complex with at least five associated features. One feature, Feature C, is a basalt, concrete, and wooden structure utilized for pumping water to animals (using the wind). A dated concrete pad possibly reads "1940." Testing did not occur at this site. Site 16111 is a wall and mound. The site has also been given an agricultural function, and it assumed to be part of the larger Kona Field System. This small site was not tested. Site16113 is a small complex that is a possible habitation site that may have been utilized in association with agriculture at the surrounding mounds. Feature A is a large enclosure consisting of stacked walls atop a level pahoehoe bedrock area. Feature B is an amorphous C -shape or modified outcrop that may have served as a temporary shelter. Testing did not occur at this site because of a paucity of deposits. Site 16114 is a small terrace in the same general area as Site 16113. It is located in the center of a large number of unrecorded agricultural mounds and was tested during the inventory survey. A radiocarbon age detemtination from Layer 11 of TU -1(6490 cmbd) returned a probable date ofAD 1516-1595 (RC -1249, BETA -49080) (Table 5). Site 16115 is a cluster of at least five features indicative of both habitation and agricultural activities. Four of the five features appear associated with agriculture; one feature (Feature E) may be an associated temporary habitation. Test units were placed at Features A and Ii, but only one radiocarbon age determination was returned. A sample was taken from TU -2A, in Layer I at 15-36 cmbd. This came from a paved area in a small lava blister cave that was exposed under Feature A. The sample returned a probable date range of AD 1470-1954 (RC -1244, BETA - 49075) (Table 5). Site 16116 is a large agriculturaliburial complex situated on the eastern edge of the project area near the proposed Alii. Highway. A total of eight features were recorded at the site; they include a large, amorphous enclosure, several mounds, platforms, and a modified outcrop. A number of test units I 11 11 CONCLUSION were placed within features in thesite. Two features that were tested (Feature D and Feature E) contained human remains; theremainderof the testunits failed todiscloseburials. Three of the test units did return radiocarbon age determinations. TU -1 (Layer I, 62-103 cmbd) at Feature D, a platform with burial, returned a probable age of AD 1790-1850 (RC -1243, BETA -49074) (Table 5). TU -2 at Feature E, a platform, disclosed human remains, and Layer II -V (74-134 cmbd) was dated to a probable age of AD 1453-1644 (RC -1248, BETA -49079) (Table 5), well within the range of the Late Prehistoric. This test unit disclosed an atypicalburial treatment; a capstone had been placed over the skull and the burial was placed inside what appears to be a stone -lined chamber or cist. Further excavation (if necessary) could disclose further information. TU -6 at Site 16116 was placed in Feature G, a mound. Layer II (93-116 embd) retumed a probable date of AD 1413- 1641 (RC -1247, SETA -49078), within the range of other dated features at the site. TU -8 at Site 16116 was placed in Feature H, a small mound located on the extreme eastern edge of the site. This well -made unit of piled basalt cobbles was thought to contain a burial or other cultural remains. Neither of the above were located and insufficient charcoal was located for a radiometric date. Site 16117 has been designated as a single -component site although other agricultural features are nearby (as they are in other portions of the project area). This platform (or modified outcrop) was assigned a habitation function (probably temporary), but it may also have been used for agricultural purposes. Testing also occurred at this site to determine presence or absence of human remains, but none were found. The feature was not dated due to an insufficient amount of radiocarbon. Site 16118 is also a single-componentsite,mostprobably associated with the ubiquitous agricultural features in the general area. It is asingle, low enclosure situated on the north side of the project area and located atop a broad, elevated pahoehoe flow, As with the nearby 16117, the site could have served a temporary habitation function. Only a very small amount of soil was present, so the site was not tested. Site 16119 is aprobable habitation terrace located in the east -central portion of the project area. It is near Site 16116 and could beanassociatedhabitationten-ace (orlowplatform) for workers at the agricultural features in the area. The site was not tested. 35 Site 16133 is a probable agricultural complex found in the north -central part of the project area. It consists of two terraces and a modified outcrop. Two Test Units were placed at this site. TU -1, at Feature C, a terrace, was excavated to a depth of 0.39 in below surface. This test did notdisclosethe presence ofhumanrenaimcraiddau TU-2in Feature B (also a terrace) failed to disclose any cultural material, indicating that this feature may also havebeenused for agricultural purposes. Because itmaybe affectedbythe proposed development, a previously identified site (6337) was tested during the current project. The functional interpretation of habitation/ boundary had been assigned to Site 6337 before testing. The dates obtained from testing at the site are both prehistoric. Feature E (wall) appears to be historicfrom construction and placement. This latter feature (E), therefore is probably not associated with 6337, but is a lata ranching development The remaining features of 6337 within the project area (Features B, C, and D) appear to be associated with prehistoric babitation. Feature B at Site 6337 is a well -made, faced and stacked platform that is six to seven courses high The top slopes slightly rnakai, and some attempt at rough paving is indicated on the top. Based on general appearance, : Feature B may be a habitation terrace. TU -1 was placed in the feature and it was c.1.75mbefore adecomposing bedrock was reached. Inlayer lII (1.18-1.64 cmbs), sufficient charcoal was returned for a radiometric age determination. This sample was dated to a probable age of AD 690-1160 (RC1245, BETA-49076)(Table 5). TU -2 was placed in Feature C, at the extreme northeast portion of the project area. Feature C is a small, well -made structure of indeterminate function It may have served as a shrine or habitation TU -2 was placed here to determine the presence or absence of human remains. The excavation was dug approximately 1.30 in until bedrock was reached, but no indication of human remains was noted. Thr pieces of historic glass were found, but no midden or charcoal. TU -3 was placed in the northwest corner of Feature D, a terrace with scattered shell midden on the surface. It was dug in what was thought to be a stone -lined hearth to obtaindating material. The placed stones in the area consisted of a vertical basalt slab at the south, two horizontal slabs on the north, and smallboulders on the east and west. The unit was dug down approximately 0.50 in, where a cavity too small to be excavated was encountered. The cavity contained a sterile silty loam and the unit was terminated. Layer II (0.02.030 in belowsurface)containedshellmidden many coral fragments, and charcoal. The charcoal was daW to a probable age range of AD 1010-1396 (RC -1246, BETA -49077) (Table 5). • CONCLUSION Many of the sites in the project area relate to agriculture; this is not unexpected because of the proximity to the Kona Field System, which is ...estimated to spansome 4.8 by 29 kilometers. The dominant archaeological features are parallel stone field boundaries, anywhere from 8 to 15 meters apart, which demarcated cultivated fields. Within these are various minor agricultural features, including terraces and mounds, as well as scattered residential features, including terraces and temples (Kirch 1985:167). The area was utilized in the past for horticulture, and in proto-historic and historic times also for animal husbandry. As stated in Handy and Handy (1972): Kona ... with its decomposing lavamixed withhumus and intermittent rainfall which soaks away quickly in the porous soil and rock, is ideal for sweet -potato cultivation. Sweet potatoes were the staple in lowland localities where there was sandy soil, as at Kailua... (1972:526). Writing of his work at the proposed Kahakai (Kailua- Kona) Elementary School just to the east-southeast of the current project area, Welch (1982) described two environmental zones, nmuka and niakai, with the Kuakini Wall marking the boundary between them. According to Welch, the lower (or kola) zone (containing the current project area): ...seems to have been the major habitation area, containing a variety of different types of features associated with habitation. Residences were dispersed throughout this zone; there is no evidence of a nucleated village. Interspersed among the house platforms are burial platforms, communal structures, habitation and burial caves, temporary shelters, enclosures, walls, terrace walls, and rock mounds..a range of domestic, political, religious, and subsistence activities was conducted (1982:87). The current project area falls within Newman's (1970) "Sweet Potato/ Wauke Zane," of the Kona Field System This zone, whichruns in elevation from sea level to 500 ft (0-150 m) AMSL and whichreceives seasonal rainfall ranging from 30- 50 inches (0.8-12 m). Sweet potatoes and wauke were grown in very rocky areas of this zone (1970:134). kn Basing her work on Newman (1970:128-134) and Kelly (1983:55-68), Schilt (1984), has defined four subzones of the Kona Feld System Ranging in elevation from sea level to 12W in (4000 ft), they include the kola (coastal area), kaluutu (seaward slope), 'apa'a (upland slope) and 'anur'u (upland jungle). Newmans (1970) Sweet Potato/Wauke Zone is in Schilt's kola zone. Schilt notes that crops cultivated in this zone during late prehistory include sweet potatoes, gourd, and wauke. According to early historic -period accounts (c. AD 1778-1825) cabbage, melons, onions, oranges and tobacco were grown in the zone. These crops gave way to beans, coffee, com, cotton, pineapple, Irish potatoes, and pumpkin during the years c. 1825-1850 (1984:6). Both Newman and Kelly included verbatim accounts of early visitors to the fields, and Schilt used the accounts along withdata concerning environmental parameters (topography, flooding, soils, seasonality, and vegetation) to assess site patterning. Schilt (1984:284) then summarized cultural phases in her subzones in terms of five phases which overall extend from c. A.D. 1050 to the modem era. In the Phase I, Pioneer Settlement: c. AD 1050 to 1400, there was sporadic use oflowland slopes and caves and later, possible de velopment of mauka subzcnes. During Phase 11, Garden Developments (c. AD 1400-1600 to 1650), the kola zone was used for small gardens, with caves serving as temporary shelters. Soil depth in the zone increased during thisperiodbyeresional deposition resulting from development of the upland subzones. During Phase III, Refuge, Habitation, and Intensive Gardening (c. 1600 to 1650-1779), the rnauka portion of the zone was intensively planted with sweet potatoes, wauke, and probably ipu (gourds). Some permanent habitation took place, but habitation was more commonly temporary. It is probable that enclosures, probably for pigs, were built during this phase and that suitable caves were modified for use as refuge caves. The ntauka areas were completely developed by the end of this phase. Phase IV, Historic habitation and Gardening (a AD 1779 to 1850), is marked by a decrease in kola cultivation, possibly reflecting population decline. Some permanent habitation took place during this time, primarily makai of the Great Wall ofKuakmi. Althoughsomepertionsofku/alands were being claimed by Hawaiians during the Great Mahele, no awards of parcels were made within the project area. Some of the lands were being converted to grazing by the 18409. During Phase V, Historic Ranching (c. A.D. 1850 to modem times), there was a total shift to grazing,following the awards of kola lands to individuals. There were isolated permanent habitations (mostly of upland slopes) related to ranching. Ranching in the area has since been almost entirely displaced by urban activities and tourism. I I J I I 1 I 0 0 CONCLUSION The Kona Feld System can also be compared to the Hawaiian cultural and historical sequence as proposed by Kirch (1985). Kirch'sproposed sequence is composed offour majorperiods: Colonization (AD 300-600), Developmental (AD 600-1100), Expansion (AD 1100-1650), and Proto- historic (AD 1650-1795). Schilt's data seems to indicate that occupation and initial development of the Kona Field System began sometime during Kirch's late Developmental Period, with activity increasing during the Expansion and Proto- historic Periods. It is also important to note that during the Expansion Period, the social and political organization of the societyunderwentradical change,suchas rankrifferentiation, expansion of settlements throughout the lowlands, and the establishment of the ahupaa'aunits for territorial organization (possibly due to the diminishing of available lands). One other important factor that appears to be a direct result of the expanding population is the intensification of the economic production. Along with the invention (or at least expansion) of aquaculture, the establishment of the major dryland field systems (e.g. the Kona Field System) became vital tofeeding the rapidly expanding population. Summary of Site Distribution The sample of sites located during the archaeological inventory survey of the proposed Alii Drive Family Housing Project can be divided into two major groups: habitations or complexes, and agricultural sites (which may include temporary habitation utilized by those tending the crops). The majority of the sites also appear to be prehistoric, but the historic and recent are represented by the historic burial at Site 16116 (Feature D) the ranching activities at Site 16111 and the stone walls that are present in the project area. A great number of the observed archaeological features are terraces and mounds that are part of the Kona Field System. These features appear to be clustered throughout the eastern half of the project area along slopes and ridges. Many of these seem to have resulted from the clearing of area for planting, or from conscious construction. The terraces and mounds probably served both to capture soils eroding downslope and to retain moisture for planting. Both feature types them became useful for planting. Those sites withassociated features indicating temporary shelterorworkareas related to agriculture are found throughout the eastern portion of the project area and are typically located both on ridges and in the lower portions between ridges. Because of the density of agricultural features within the project area, the site boundaries are somewhat arbitrary. One way of viewing the sites in the project area is consider only 37 those features which are indicative of habitation as separate sites and to consider the ubiquitous background features as components of the KonaField System (Site 6601). Previously declared eligible for inclusion on the NRNP, the Kona Feld System is a very large complex of aboriginal Hawaiian dryland cultivation and habitation remains which covets an area approximately 3 by 18 mi (4.8 by 28.9 km), extending from north of Kailua south to Hookena. Dryland agricultural features comprising components of the Kona Feld System aredistributed throughout the project area. However,because the project area is on the fringes of the field system, the features it contains are not the formal fields and well -made kuaiwi walls that are found in the heart of the system. When the projectfmdings are viewed with this distinction between the habitation sites and the background agricultural sites, the number of potential habitation features (all of which appear to be short term, temporary, or of recurring usage), is limited to seven features at six site locations. These features are Feature B and D at Site 6337, Feature B at Site 16113, the habitation terrace at Site 16114, Feature E at Site 16115, the small enclosure at Site 16117 and the terrace at Site 16119. Although not all of the features indicated above were subjected to testing during this project, four of the sites tested did return probable radiocarbon age determinations. Feature D (Site 6337) was given a probable date range of AD 1010- 1396 (RC -1246, BETA -49077). This is somewhat early according to Schilt's range for development of the KonaField System, but the latter portion is within Schilt's Phase I (or Pioneer Settlement Phase) whichshe posits fromc. AD 1050- 1400. Schilt (1984) feels there was sporadic use of the lowland slopes and caves at this time. Feature B at Site 6337 was also dated, and yielded a very early range of AD 690-1160 (RC -1245, BETA -49076). This date places the feature (at the later probable age range) also within the Schilt Pioneer Settlement Phase, but the date may be the result of an early natural burn in the area and not associated with Feature B at all. The small terrace at Site 16114 returned a probable radiocarbon age range of AD 1516-1595 (RC -1249, BETA - 49080), well within Schilt's Phase II, Garden Developments, when the kola was used for small gardens, and caves were used for temporary shelter. Feature E at Site 16115 was not dated, but the nearby Feature A yielded a probable age range of AD 1470-1954 (RC -1244, BETA -49075) from a-rnple obtained from a small paved area in a blister cave. It is not known what type of association (if any) there is between the above features at 0 CONCLUSION Site 16115, but the age ranges obtained indicate that this site might also fall within the Schilt Phase II, Garden Developments. Three additional features at Site 16116 completed the radiocarbon age determinations derived from the inventory survey. A probable age of AD 1672-1946 (RC -1243, BETA - 49074) was derived from fill above and around the human burial in Feature D. The early portion of this probable age range is within Schilt's Phase II, but the large span extends to recent times. Feature E (also a burial feature) contained a sufficient amount of charcoal fora probable age determination, and a probable range between AD 1453-1644 was returned. This is well within the Phase E Garden Developments as indicated by Schilt (1984). A word of caution concerning the validity or association of these dates with the burials should be considered. It is probable that some of the charcoal is associated with the burial, since the traditional Hawaiian burial practice utilizes interment at night (Malo 1951:97, Bowen 1961). However, it is also possible that the burials (and the associated platforms) may have been placed in areas where burning had been used previously to clear land for gardening, or downslope from such areas. One other radiocarbon sample was submitted from Site 16116. This came from Feature G, a low mound located east of Features D and E. The sample yielded a probable age range of AD 1413-1641 (RC -1247, BETA - 49078). This probable date also falls within Schilt's Phase II, Garden Development period. From the number of radiocarbon dates that fall within the given ranges of Schilt's Phase R, or Garden Development period (n-5), it appears there was an increased usage of the project area during this time. As stated above, Schilt argues that the zone was being utilized for small gardens and caves were being utilized for temporary shelter. No caves were found within the immediate project area, but they are known to exist nearby (e.g. Kahakai to the southeast). It is possible that since there were no caves in the project area, small temporary shelters were utilized in the planting areas. It does not appear that any permanent habitations were present within the project area. Cordy (1981) examined several different types of permanent structures (sleeping houses,canoehouses, men'shouse,house temple, and women's eating house) at locations in west Hawaii Island. Cordy postulated that sizes ranged from small to quite large, and that these were more commonly associated with the paramount chiefs'hotsing. Single -house (the sleepinghotse)households, according to the early historic sources, appear to be the norm for commoners, along with a possible work plaza and canoe El 38 t house (ibid:74-75). Historical documents clearly indicate that permanent settlements were predominantly coastal. in Cordy's study areas.It would seem to alsohold ttvehene, where: ...There were chiefs and families of chiefs of Oahu, Molokai, Kauai, Macri. The sands of Kaiakeakua (Kailua Bay) were won down like a dromedary's back by the many feet of chiefs and chiefenes tramping over them, and Kamakahonu could be seen at night the sparkle of lights reflected in the sea like diamonds, frmn the homes of the chiefs from Kahelo to Lanihau. The number of chiefs and lesser chiefs reached into the thousands (Kamakau 1961:221-222). From the above quote and from historical information, it can be seen that the Kailua area, at least in the late eighteenth century, was densely populated by chiefs and lesser chiefs, because in Kamehameha's time (and afterward) it was a governmental center. It is probable that the more high -status residences were located along the coast, with lower status permanent housing located further inland. If this was the case, it is not surprising that no permanent houses were located in this particular project area. Perhaps the workers were allowed only temporary housing in the kula subzone when they were engaged in gardening, but were required to locate their permanent residences upland. Graves (in prep.) has found several permanent residences in her work in the Pualani Subdivision project area, located mauka of the current project area, at elevations ranging from 475-540 ft (145-165 m) AMSL. The permanent residences appear to be located onhighbenches andhilltops, and usually close to trails. Pualani and other upland areas may be the location of the permanent housing of the gardeners who worked the kula areas. Construction of the miscellaneous historic features, predominately those associated with ranching and other animal husbandry, may have begun sometime after AD 1850 and continues to the present. SUGGESTED FUTURE RESEARCH While no further work is recommended for the current project area, future archaeological research in the project - area vicinity might profitably be directed toward further refinement of the settlement pattern model. The following research questions may useful in pursuing this objective: 1. Further study to determine when episodes of ' deposition of upland, water-bom agricultural soils to the kula subzone occurred, and what caused them; U 1 1 n I • 0 CONCLUSION 2. Refinement of settlement patterns through further study of both the upland portions of the area (esp. kalu'ulu, 'apa'a, and 'ama'u subzones) and the coastal portions. These studies might examine duration, nature, and intensity of occupation; 3. Study of leeward agricultural field systems (esp. the Kona Field System) and such variables as population pressure, environmental constraints, and food production/ distribution; and 4. Comparison and analyses of archaeological data in terms of information in traditional and historic references. GENERAL, SIGNIFICANCE ' ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDED GENERAL TREATMENTS ' Significance assessments and recommended general treatments for all identified sites are summarized in Table 8. Significance categories used in the site evaluation process are based on Rules Governing Procedures for ' Historic Preservation Review to Comment on Chapter 6E-41, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Hawaii Administrative Rules; Title 13, Department of Land and Natural ' Resources; Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Division Rules (May, draft rules). The DLNR-SHPD uses these criteria for evaluating cultural resources. Sites were ' assessed for integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and in terms of the following criteria: ' (1) Criterion A. Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; ' (2) Criterion B. Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; ' (3) Criterion C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; ' or possess high artistic value; (4) Criterion D. Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or history; ' (5) Criterion E. Have an important traditional to the native Hawaiian people or cultural value to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional cultural practices, beliefs, events or oral accounts. 39 Based on the above federal criteria, 13 of the 14 sites identified during the current work are assessed as significant solely for information content. A single site (16116) was assessed as significant for information value, cultural value, and as an excellent example of a site type. Since extensive mapping and testing was conducted during the current project, and because many of the features are ubiquitous types in the Kona Field System, no further work is recommended for the first 13 sites. Data collected from these sites is considered to be sufficient; their preservation is not considered essential, although some sites might be considered for inclusion into development landscaping. It is recommended that all ground disturbance be monitored by a qualified archaeologist. The one remaining site (16116) is significant for information content, and for cultural value because of the two burial platforms it includes (Features D and E). Site 16116 is also assessed as an excellent example of a site type at the local and regional level because of the burial platforms at Features D and E. No further work is recommended for Site 16116, with the possible exception of the two burial platforms, for which preservation "as is;' (and possible inclusion into landscaping) is the first choice. If it is deemed necessary that Features D and E be disinterred, then further data collection is recommended for these features also. In this case, consultation with the Hawaii Island Burial Council and DLNR-SHPD should occur. The data collected in the field is consistent with the data outlined in the Historical Documentary Research (Appendix B, this report), and supported the testimony concerning dairy activities cited in the Historical Documentary Research section of this report. Site 16111 is indicative of just such an operation. The assessments and recommendations presented in this report have been based on the findings of an inventory survey of the project area. There is always the possibility, however remote, that potentially significant, unidentified surface and subsurface cultural remains will be encountered in the course of further archaeological investigations or subsequent development activities. In such situations, archaeological -consultation should be sought immediately. Irl w CONCLUSION 40 Table S. Summary of General Significance Assessments and Recommended General Treatments Feature Integrity significance Evaluations General Recommendations A B C D E FDC NFW PID PAI Designation 6335 + + - + _ 6336 + + - - + _ 6337 + + - + - 15108 + + - + - 16111 + + - + 16112 + + - - + 16113 + + + 16114 + + + 16115 + + + 16117 + + - + 16118 + + - + 16119 + - + - - + 16133 + - - - + - - + Subtotal: 0 0 0 13 0 0 13 0 0 16116 + - - + + + + _ - + Subtotal: 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 0 1 Total: 1 14 1 1 - - 1 *If avoidance of the site is not possible, then further data collection is recommended. General Significance Categories: A = Important for historical contribution to signipcont events andior broad patterns of history 8 e Important for association with the lives of important individuals in history C = Excellent example of site type at local, region, island, State, or National level D = Important for information content E = Culturally significant Recommended General Treatments: FDC = Further data collection necessary (detailed recording, surface collections, and limited excavations, and possibly subsequent data recoveryimitigation excavations) NFW = Nor further work of any kind necessary, sufficient data collected, no preservation potential PID = Preservation with some level of interpretive development recommended PAI = Preservation "as is", with no further work (and possible inclusion into landscaping) CII I LI 0 0 41 ACHP (Advisory Council on Historic Preservation) 1985 Guidelines for Consideration of Traditional Cultural Values in Historic Preservation Review. Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, Washington, D.C. (Draft Report, August) Armstrong, R.W. (ed.) 1983 Atlas of Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. (Second edition) Barrera, W., Jr. 1971 Archaeological Excavations and Survey of Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. Dept. Anthro, B.P. Bishop Museum. Report Series 71-10. Bowen, R. 1961 Hawaiian Disposal of the Dead. Unpublished Masters Thesis, University of Hawaii. Buck, P.H (Te Rangi Hiroa) 1964 Arts and Crafts of Hawaii. Vol. VI, Canoes. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 45. B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Carlson, A.K., and P.H. Rosendahl 1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Pualani Development -Phase II, Lands ofPuapuaalstand 2nd,North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 764-061190, Prepared for Pualani Development Company. Ching, F.K.W., E Neller, S. Palama, and P.B. Griffin 1973 The Archaeology of North Kona: From theAhupua'aof Kahului to theAhupua'aof Kahaluu. SurfaceSurvey- Realignment of Alii Drive. Hawaiian Archaeological Journal 73-2. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii. Prepared for Belt, Collins, & Associates. Cordy, R.H. 1981 A Study ofPrehistoric Social Change: TheDevelopmentofComplexSocieties inthe Hawaiian Islands. New York Academic Press. Dunn, A.E., and P.H. Rosendahl 1991 Preliminary Report: Phase 1(A) -Site Identification Phased Intensive Archaeological Survey- Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report No. 900-052191. Prepared for R. M. Towill Corporation. Dye, T. 1978 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Four Aliemative Sites for the Kaih w Keauhou Elementary School. Report Ms. 031078. Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. W W REFERENCES CITED Emory, K.P., W.J. Bonk, and Y.H. Sinoto. 42 t 1959 Hawaiian Archaeology: Fishhooks. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 47. B.P. Bishop Press, Honolulu. , Graves, D.K. 1991a Interim Report: Pualani Residential Community (Phase 1), Mitigation Program - Phase II, Archaeological , Data Recovery, First Zoning Increment, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-17:por. 28, 29). PHRI Report 962-032291. Prepared for Pualani Development Company. 1991b Interim Report: Pualani Residential Community Mitigation Program - Phase H, Archaeological Data , Recovery Second Zoning Increment, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-17:Por. 28, 29). PHU Report 962-070891. Prepared for Pualani Development Company. ' 1991c Interim Report: Pualani Residential Community (Phase II), Archaeological Data Recovery, Wastewater Treatment Facility, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 1055- ' 060491. Prepared for Pualani Development Company. in Archaeological Data Recovery Program at Pualani Residential Community, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, prep. North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 962-030192. Prepared for Pualani Development , Company. Hammatt, H.H. ' 1980 Archaeological Study of a Shoreline Property, TMK:7-5-20:22,34, Puapua'a, Kona, Hawaii Island. Report 14-158. Archaeological Research Center of Hawaii. , Handy, E.S.C., and E.G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii, Their Life, Lore, and Environment. B. P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 223. B.P. , Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu.. (with M.K. Pukui) Head, J.A., S.T. Goodfellow, and P.H. Rosendahl ' 1991 Archaeological Inventory Survey - Alii Drive Sewer Project, Lands of Puaa 2nd and 3rd, Waiaha 2nd and 3rd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-5-18:7,8). PHRI Report 937-081091. Prepared for M 8r. E Pacific, Inc. ' Hommon, RJ., and P.H. Rosendahl 1983 Archaeological Investigation of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridors, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. Science , Management, Inc. Prepared for Belt, Collins, & Associates. Jensen, P.M. ' 1990 Archaeological Mitigation Program, Pualani Residential Community. Phase I - Mitigation Plan for Data Recovery, Interim Site Preservation, Burial Treatment, and Monitoring, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North ' Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 724-101589. Prepared for Pualani Development Corporation. 1991 Archaeological Data Recovery Plan, Pualani Development Company Wastewater Treatment Facility, Lands , of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PERI Report 1025-020191. Prepared for Pualani Development Company. • 0 REFERENCES CITED 43 ' Ksmakau, S.M. ' 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Kay, EA I1979 Hawaiian Marine Shells. Reef and Shore Fauna of Hawaii, Section 4: Mollusca. A P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 64(4). B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. ' Kelly, M. 1983 Na Mala O Kona: Gardens of Kona. A History of Land Use in Kona, Hawaii. Departmental Report Series ' 83-2. Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. Prepared for the Department of Transportation, State of Hawaii. Kirch, P.V. ' 1973 Archaeological excavations at Kahalu'u, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. Report Series 73-1., Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. ' 1979 Marine Exploitation in Prehistoric Hawaii: Archaeological Investigations at Kalahuipua'a, Hawaii Island. Pacific Anthropological Records No. 29. Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: ' University of Hawaii Press. ' Landrum, J. (IH), A.E. Haun, and P.H. Rosendahl 1990 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Test Excavations, Kahakai Development Project Area, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 157-070185. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. (With K. Delimont) (Draft). Malo, D. 1951 Hawaiian Antiquities. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication No. 2. B.P. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. ' Newman, T.S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii in A.D. 1778. Division of State Parks, Departrnent of Land and Natural Resources. ' Robins, J.J., J.H. Toenjes, and H.H. Hammatt ' 1990 An Archaeological Survey and Testing at Puapua'a, Kona, Hawaii (TMK: 7-5-20:73,74,75). Cultural Surveys Hawaii. Prepared for Alii Drive General Partnership. ' Sato, H.H., W. Ikeda, R. Pseth, R. Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation ' Service and the Univ. of Hawaii Agri. Experiment Station. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C. Schilt, R. 1984 Subsistence and conflict in Kona, Hawaii: An Archaeological Study of the Kuakini Highway Realignment Corridor. Report Series 84-1, Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. Irl Sinoto, Y.H. and M. Kelly REFERENCES CITED • 44 ' 1975 Archaeological and Historical Survey of Pakini-Nui and Pakini-/ki Coastal Sites: Waiahukini, Kailikii, and Hawea, Ka'u, Hawaii. Report Series 75-1, Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. Soehren, L.J. 1978 Letter Report of an Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of a Portion of Puapuaa, North Kona, Hawaii. Prepared for Kobayashi Development & Construction, Inc. Stearns, H.T., and G.A. MacDonald 1946 Geology and Ground -Water Resources of the Island of Hawaii. Hawaii Division Hydrography Bulletin 9. Stuiver, M. and G.W. Pearson 1986 High -Precision Calibration of Radiocarbon Time Scale, AD 1950 to 500 BC. Radiocarbon, 28:805-838. Suggs, R.C. 1961 The Archaeology of Nuku Hiva, Marquesas Islands, French Polynesia. Papers of the American Museum of Natural History 49(1) Walker, A.T. 1991 Archaeological Field Inspection, Alii Drive Family Housing Project, Land of Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (T YM:3-7-5-20:71,72). PHRI Report 1001-020491. Prepared for Central Realty, Ltd. Walker, A.T., and P.H. Rosendahl , 1984 Preliminary Report Upon Completion of Field Work: Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey-Kahakai Development Project Area, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5- 20:1,76). PHRI Report 141-111284. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. 1985a Supplementary Report: Archaeological Reconnaissance of TMK Parcel 76 and the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor, Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kahakai Development Project Area, Lands of , Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 141-013185. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. 1985b Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kahakai Development Project Area, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and ' 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii. PHRI Report 141-111984. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey - Pualani Subdivision, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona ' District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-17:Por. 28, 29). PHRI Report 367-041988. Prepared for Pualani Development Company. Welch, D.J. ' 1982 Archaeological Survey and Excavations of the Kahakai (Kailua-Kona) Elementary School Site, North Kona, ' Hawaii. Report Ms. 051082. Dept. Anthro., B.P. Bishop Museum. • 0 A-1 SITE DESCRIPTIONS SITE NO.: State: 6335/6336 (Figures C-1 and C-1) SITE TYPE: Wall - — - - - TOPOGRAPHY: Gently seaward sloping paboehoe flow with many bedrock outcrops. This site is on the southwest portion of a flow ridge. VEGETATION: koa-haole, lantana, kiawe, and guinea grass - CONDITION: Fair -good INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Historic FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Boundary DIMENSIONS: 1.10 in high by 0.60 in wide DESCRIPTION: The sites consist of walls constructed of well-stacked and faced basalt boulders. SITE NO.: State: 6337 SITE TYPE: Complex (4 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: Rolling pahoehoe lava flows with many bedrock outcrops. VEGETATION: koa-haole. kiawe, 'lima, and cucumber. CONDITION: Fair -good INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Possible historic FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Boundary - habitation DESCRIPTION: The site complex consists one terrace (Feature B), two platforms, (Feature C and D), and one wall (Feature E). FEATURE B: Platform (Figure C-21) FUNCTION: Habitation' DIMENSIONS: 5.40 in by 520 in by 1.25 in DESCRIPTION: Feature D consists of a platform. This platform is constructed of large basalt cobbles and small to medium boulders of natural pahoehoe. The wall on the south is well -faced and stacked six to seven courses high. The east wall is of similar construction, while the north and west walls axe somewhat lower and not as nicely faced. There is a small puka in the northern half. The top slopes slightly makai and indicates some rough attempt at paving. The west and north wall have probably collapsed sometime in the past and were also possibly faced. Feature D is located on a rolling pahoehoe lava flow with many bedrock outcrops. Vegetation in the area includes kiawe, 'Wma, koa-haole, and cucumber. It is unaltered and is in good condition. Waterworn coral and sparse basalt were observed at this feature and a c. 0.30 in thick deposit of fine-grained silt was also observed. FEATURE C. Platform (Figures C-3 and C-23) FUNCTION: Indeterminate DIMENSIONS: 3.00 m by 2.00 m by 0.80 m DESCRIPTION: Feature C consists of a platform. This platform is roughly rectangular, constructed of stacked basalt boulders, and is raised and faced on the south and east sides. Ile surface is roughly level, but collapsed on the west side. The structure is located c. 15.00 in west of CL Stake 60+ 50, and is possibly a burial feature. FEATURE D: Terrace (Figures C-4 and C-24) FUNCTION: Habitation DIMENSIONS: 8.00 in by 8.00 in by 0.00 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of a terrace. This terrace is roughly rectangular and is constructed of crudely piled basalt boulders that have cracked apart. It is slightly raised on the west side. The large boulders are 0.30 in in diameter and the smaller stones on the west are 0.20-0.40 in in diameter. There appears to be small planting areas on the terrace and soil with a thin scatter of marine shell midden, This structure is located c. 40,00 in west of CL Stake 63+50. FEATURE E: Wall FUNCTION: Possible boundary DIMENSIONS: 188.00m by 0.70 m by l.10m DESCRIPTION: Feature E consists of a wall. This wall extends from east -west, enters the project area near corridor centerline CL Stake 64+00 and extends west to Site 16111. It is built of well-stacked and faced basalt boulders. The wall is probably a historic boundary wall. SITE NO,: State: 15108 PHRI:1067-38 SITE TYPE: Terrace (Figure C-25) TOPOGRAPHY: Gently seaward sloping pahoehoe flow with many bedrock outcrops. This site is on the southwest Pont on of a flow ridge. VEGETATION: koa-haole, lantana, kiawe, and guinea grass. CONDITION: Far INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 10.00 in by 8.00 m by 0.73 in DESCRIPTION: The site consists of a terrace with six to eight planting boxes. There are good walls on the south and west The north wall ties into the bedrock. The terrace is constructed around a bedrock outcrop using medium cobbles to medium sized boulders. The planting boxes are formed by vaults into the terrace. The site is located c. 40.00 in at 510 degrees from the northeast comer stake (of the project area) on the- Site 6337 will. Cultural dgposits consist of e. 0.10- 0.15 in of organic silt in the bedrock pocket at the site. 0 APPENDIX A SITE NO.: State: 16111 PHRI: 1067-24 SITE TYPE: Complex (5 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: Flat pahoehoe flow forting a small basin area. The makai area of this basin is crossed by the current Alii Drive. VEGETATION: Kiawe, guinea grass. CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Late historic/recent FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Agriculture DESCRIPTION: Thesite complex consists of two enclosures (Feature A and B), one tower/wall (Feature C), and two concrete troughs (Feature D and E). FEATURE A: Enclosure FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 124.00 in by 59.00 in by 1.15 in DESCRIPTION: This is a mostly square structure, with the alignment along Alii Drive longer than the mauka alignment This feature is the outside corral containing another enclosure in the northeast comer (Feature B), a windmill/wall (Feature C), and two concrete water troughs (Feature D and E). Feature F, another holding pen with a loading chute, lies to the south along Alii Drive. There are at least four openings or gates in the wall, one each on the north and south and two along the eastern wall. Feature A is located immediately east of Alii Drive (across Alii Drive from utility poles No. 40, No. 41, No. 42) with the poles oriented on the makai side of Alii Drive. Feature A is constructed by stacking and facing small basalt boulders six -seven courses high both inside and outside, with rubble core in the center. Feature A is unaltered and is in good condition. Thick rolled wire, pipe, beer bottles, and cans are found at this feature. FEATURE B: Enclosure FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 55.80 in by 0.70 in (wall thickness) by 1.60 in DESCRIPTION: Feature B enclosure is a smaller holding pen located in the northeast comer of the Feature A enclosure. It is constructed in a similar manner to Feature A. The gate is on the north, in the comer. There are poles set around the inside with wire braces holding them straight Along the northwest porion, hog wire has been placed on these interior poles to raise the height of the fence. The remains of the gate were also located at the entrance on the north. It is unaltered and in fair condition. There were various cans and bottles at the feature. FEATURE C: Well (Figure C-5) FUNCTION: Water catchment DIMENSIONS: 2.10 in by 2.00 in by 9.00 in DESCRIPTION: This feature includes the basalt concrete - A -2 , lined water well, the windmill tower, a small basalt and concrete pad located south-southeast of the well, and a small pump shed located immediately to the west The tower is constructed of 2 x 4 and 4 x 4 planed lumber and large wire nails. The small pad was built using small and medium basalt boulders and medium and large cobbles. The shed was built on a cement and basalt pad with 2 x 4 lumber and corrugated metal. The purpose of the shed was probably to house the pump used to draw water up from the well and transport it via pipes to the two concrete troughs and possibly to an old bathtub lying near Alii Drive. Feature C is located in the south central portion of Feature A. It is unaltered and in fair condition. Iron pipe, planed lumber and wire nails, bottles, cans, and rubber tubing were found at and around the feature. FEATURE D: Concrete structure FUNCTION: Water catchment DIMENSIONS: 3.09 in by 1.15 in by 0.55 in DESCRIPTION: This is a formed concrete water trough used to water cattle. It appears to have been poured on site atop a concrete base. It is constructed of formed concrete poured with vertical wire supports imbedded within. Feature D is unaltered and is in fair condition. FEATURE E: Concrete structure FUNCTION: Water catchment DIMENSIONS: 2.70 in by 0.92 in by 0.45 in DESCRIPTION: Feature E consists of a formed and pouted concrete trough for domestic animal watering. Feature E is located at 2920 from the Feature C tower (within Feature A). It is unaltered and in fair condition. Various broken concrete pieces are located makai. FEATURE F: Enclosure FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 44.00 in by 9.10 in by 1.15 in DESCRIPTION: This enclosure is shaped as an expending rectangle which joins the southeast corner of Feature A. It is joined with Feature A by a small break in the SW comer of the Feature A stone wall. There is another break in the SW which leads to a wooden stock loading dock fronting the mauka side of Alii Drive. SITE NO.: State: 16112 PHRI: 1067-25 SITE TYPE: Wall (Figure C-6) TOPOGRAPHY: Roughlylevel, very gradual west-southwest slope, broken up by bedrock outcrops of various sires. VEGETATION: Dense grasses and lantana ground cover with kiawe throughout the area. CONDITION: Fair • 0 APPENDIX A INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Agriculture DpdENSIONS: 13.00 in by 1.50 m by 0.60 m DESCRIPTION: This site consists of a low wall with a small mound. They are constructed of basalt cobbles atop and along a bedrock outcrop. SITE NO.: State: 16113 (Figure A-1) PHRI: 1067-14 SITE TYPE: Complex (2 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: Fla4 roughly level terrain broken up by bedrock outcrops, slight decline to the west. VEGETATION: Kiawe, koa-haole, lantana, and grass. CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation) agriculture DESCRIPTION: The site complex consists of one low - walled enclosure (Feature A) and one C -shape (Feature B). FEATURE A: Enclosure (Figure C-7) FUNCTION: Agriculture/possible habitation DIMENSIONS: 11.00 m by 10.00 m by 1.40 m DESCRIPTION: Feature A consists of a walled enclosure. The wall alternates between piled and stacked/faced basalt pahoehoe cobbles three -six couseshigh. The walled enclosure is situated on a pahoehoe now that slopes to the west The walls of the enclosure are stacked and faced. Various areas exhibit disturbance. Feature A is located c. 10.00 m west of the west edge of Feature B. The site is at c. 10.00 m north of the southern boundary of the project. There are large sections of the wall still intact, although the section on the west appears recently stacked. The majority is one -three courses high. Feature A is altered and is in poor to fair condition. No portable remains were visible except for a piece of waterwom coral. The deposit is c. 0.10-0.15 m of silty organics, found only in the cracks of the pahoehoe. FEATURE B: C -shape (Figure C-8) FUNCTION: Habitation DDKENSIONS: 6.00 m by 2.80 m by 0.44 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of pahoehoe cobbles and small boulders piled and stacked to form a large, rough C - shape with a smaller C -shape built into the west end. Feature B is located c. 10.00 m due east of the east edge of Feature A. It is unaltered but in poor condition. No portable remains were visible at this feature. There is organic matter from grass (c. 0.03-0.05 m thick) over the entire floor surface. A-3 SITE NO.: State: 16114 Other. CSH 47 PHRI: 1067-16 SITE TYPE: Terrace (Figure C-9) TOPOGRAPHY: Roughly level, slight westward slope to oceanatc.300mtowest Areabrokenup by bedrock outcrops of various sizes. VEGETATION: Kiawe, lantana, koa-haole, and guinea gam• CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation DIMENSIONS: 16.30 m by 3.50 m by 1.00 in DESCRIPTION: The site consists of a stacked and faced terrace built onto the south and west faces of a bedrock outcrop. It is constructed of small basalt boulders and large cobbles stacked three-four toruses high and five -six courses wide for the fust c. 7.00 m (west -east), culminating in a piled mound of small boulders and large cobbles. From this mound, the terrace continues after c. 1.00 m of intervening bedrock. This second part of the terrace is three courses high and three- four courses wide. This feature etuds in a second boulder/cobble mood All parrs of the feature are more or less contiguous. SITE NO.: State: 16115 Other. CSH 29 PHRI: 1067-23 SITE TYPE: Complex (5 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: A series of roughly north -south miming and westward facing bedrock outcrops which step down from east to west as part of the overall westward slope. VEGETATION: Large kiawe in various stages of life and death are mixed with smaller kiawe saplings, k1u, lantana, koa- haole, guinea grass, and vines. CONDITION: Good INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation/ Agriculture DESCRIPTION: The site complex consists of three terraces (Feature A,B, and D), one mound (Feature C) and one enclosure (Feature E). The overall dimensions are c. 26.00 m (north -south) by 10.00 m (east -west). (Figure A-2) FEATURE A: Terrace FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 2.40 in by 2.40 m by 0.45 in DESCRIPTION: Feature A consists of an amorphous depression or cavity that has been filled in with basalt cobbles of varying sizes to fort a roughly level terrace with a paved surface and a small mound. The mound is piled three to four 0 • APPENDIX A A-4 Figure A-1. Site 16113 courses high above the pavement, but appears to be part of the fill. Feature A is located on the south end of the site, c. 1.00 in east of the west face of bedrock, and c. 5.00 m at 55' from the north end of Feature A to the south end of Feature B. Feature A is unaltered and is in good condition. Three waterwom cobbles and two pieces of coral (c. 0.10 m by 0.10 m in diameter) were found on the surface. FEATURE B: Terrace FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 2.80 in by 2.20 to by 0.40 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of a roughly square paved area on the slope past the base of the south end of a north -south running westward facing outcrop. The terrace is constructed of basalt cobbles placed as paving on the slope, forming a roughly even surface. Feature B is located c. 5.00 to at 235' from the south end of Feature B. It is unaltered but is inpoorcondition. A waterwomcobble was observed between Feature B and Feature C. FEATURE C: Mound FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 350 m by 2.60 in by 0.60 m DESCRIPTION: Feature C consists of alarge, well -piled mound. It runs along the crest of a bedrock outcrop (which runs north -south) and down its north slope. The mound is constructed of cobbles and small boulders. Thecobbles and small boulders are piled up to three courses high to form a sizable mound. Feature C is located c. 1.50 in at 245' from the north end of Feature B and c. 10.00 in at 3500 from the north end of Feature D. It is unaltered and in good condition. No portable remains were observed at this feature, however, a waterworn cobble was noted between Feature C and Feature B. FEATURE D: Terrace FUNCTION: Indeterminate DIMENSIONS: 9.00 m by 6.50 to by 1.17 in DESCRIPTION: Feature D consists of a stacked and faced terrace which runs along the edge of a southeast -northwest trending bedrock outcrop. It is constructed of basaltboulders and cobbles of various sizes stacked three -five courses high along the side abutting a bedrock outcrop facing wesL Thenarlh end of Feat&e C to the north end of Feature D is c.10.00 m at AREA COVERED WrrH TALL GRASS AND LANTAKAj% AREA Or :ALLEI� D AD i��i��►{�� V\AND SITE TAG RGi �. STACKED WALL BEDROCK FLXr AREA Figure A-1. Site 16113 courses high above the pavement, but appears to be part of the fill. Feature A is located on the south end of the site, c. 1.00 in east of the west face of bedrock, and c. 5.00 m at 55' from the north end of Feature A to the south end of Feature B. Feature A is unaltered and is in good condition. Three waterwom cobbles and two pieces of coral (c. 0.10 m by 0.10 m in diameter) were found on the surface. FEATURE B: Terrace FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 2.80 in by 2.20 to by 0.40 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of a roughly square paved area on the slope past the base of the south end of a north -south running westward facing outcrop. The terrace is constructed of basalt cobbles placed as paving on the slope, forming a roughly even surface. Feature B is located c. 5.00 to at 235' from the south end of Feature B. It is unaltered but is inpoorcondition. A waterwomcobble was observed between Feature B and Feature C. FEATURE C: Mound FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 350 m by 2.60 in by 0.60 m DESCRIPTION: Feature C consists of alarge, well -piled mound. It runs along the crest of a bedrock outcrop (which runs north -south) and down its north slope. The mound is constructed of cobbles and small boulders. Thecobbles and small boulders are piled up to three courses high to form a sizable mound. Feature C is located c. 1.50 in at 245' from the north end of Feature B and c. 10.00 in at 3500 from the north end of Feature D. It is unaltered and in good condition. No portable remains were observed at this feature, however, a waterworn cobble was noted between Feature C and Feature B. FEATURE D: Terrace FUNCTION: Indeterminate DIMENSIONS: 9.00 m by 6.50 to by 1.17 in DESCRIPTION: Feature D consists of a stacked and faced terrace which runs along the edge of a southeast -northwest trending bedrock outcrop. It is constructed of basaltboulders and cobbles of various sizes stacked three -five courses high along the side abutting a bedrock outcrop facing wesL Thenarlh end of Feat&e C to the north end of Feature D is c.10.00 m at "TGWOMM 0 I Fea. A SCORIA AS RADER Figure A-2. Site 16115 ❑ TEBT YMR \\\ FLAT MEA OSt81 FACED WAIL ii'1T=1 BEDROCK --- LIMITS OF CLEARED AREA 0 0 APPENDIX A 345°. It is unaltered and is in good condition. Marine shell and waterwom cobbles were observed at this feature. No cultural deposits were noted at this feature. FEATURE E: Enclosure (Figure C-10 and C-11) FUNCTION: Temporary habitation DIMENSIONS: 5.70 m by 4.50 in by 0.60 in DESCRIPTION: Feature E consists of a small stacked/piled basalt oval enclosure. Most of it consists of stacks and piles, but there are portions of a single tow alignment as well. Construction materials are locally obtainable pahoehoe blocks (large cobbles and small boulders) placed two to three courses high in some portions. The feature is tied into a bedrock outcrop. There are several stones scattered in the middle which may have come from the walls. Feature E is located c. 20.00 in at 1200. (TN) from Feature A. It is unaltered and is in fair condition One piece of waterworn coral was observed in the interior of the feature. A deposit c. 0.10-0.15 in thick of medium brown organic silts was also observed in the interior of the feature. SITE NO.: State: 16116 PHRI: 1067-26 SITE TYPE: Complex (8 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: Gentle seaward sloping pahoehoe flows with numerous bedrock outcrops. Gentle slope continues through site, then flattens out at Site 16112. VEGETATION: Kiawe, koa-haole, lantana, and guinea grass. CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric -early historic FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Agriculture -burial DESCRIPTION: The site complex consists of one enclosure (Feature A), four mounds (Feature B, C, G, and H), a modified outcrop (Feature F), and two platforms (Feature D and E). FEATURE A: Enclosure (Figure C-12) FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 25.00 in by 10.00 m by 1.80 m DESCRIPTION: Feature A consists of a very rough enclosure with connected mounds on the south and southwest A rough piling or paving on the north terminates in the wall alignment which passes an unknown distance to the north. Feature A is constructed of pahoehoe stones (large cobbles - medium boulders) roughly stacked and piled. The three mounds which form the southern walls of the feature are roughly faced on the interior. The southeast and east side are made up of a modified outcrop which is also roughly faced in one small area. Continuing counterclockwise, the enclosure A-6 becomes almost a terrace, although there are three to four pockets with bedrock and soil within the rocky bedrock terrace. This feature lies at the west side of the site. It is c. 80.00-90.00 m east of the site tag of Site 16112. Feature A is unaltered and ism fair condition. One waterwom basalt breadloaf sinker was observed at this feature and was collected. A c. 0.10-0.15 in thick deposit of organic silts was also observed in pockets in the pahoehoe at this feature. The rough wall beginning at the apex of Feature A was not given a feature designation. Itispiledand stacked two to three courses high, and about the same width at the south end. To the north, the wall is more sparse. FEATURE B: Mound (Figure C-13) FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 4.00 m by 2.00 in by 1.40 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of a series of unshaped basalt pieces, ranging from small cobbles to medium boulders, built against the side of an outcrop. The exposure of the mound is to the west-southwest and there is a basalt upright (c. 0.60 m high) on the northern portion of the mound. Feature B is unaltered and is in fair condition No portable remains were observed at this feature. A c. 0.10-0.25 m thick deposit of organic silts was observed in pockets at the base of the mound. FEATURE C: Mound (Figure C-14) FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 21.00 m by 15.00 m by 2.30 in DESCRIPTION: Feature C consists of a rather amorphous mound with a few internal mounds and a stacked and paved area to the south. It nets between Feature A and Feature B to the south. Feature C is constructed of mostly small and medium sized basalt boulderspiled nearand probably naturally occurring across the Feature. Feature C is unaltered but is in poor condition. No portable remains were observed at this feature, however, a c. 0.10-0.15 m thick deposit of organic silts was observed in pockets at this feature. FEATURE D: Platform (Figure A-3 and C-15) ' FUNCTION: Burial DIMENSIONS: 3.00 in by 2.50 in by 0.95 m ' DESCRIPTION: Feature D consists of a small but nicely built platform. The platform lies east of Feature B acrd C complex and in a flat spot just below Feature C. It is constructed of pahoehoerangingftomsmallcobblestomedium ' boulders. The cobbles and boulders are stacked four -five courses high. The stones present a rough facing on the interior. The top is mostly flat and paved with a few smaller , stones. Feature D is unaltered and is in 82od condition. No • a APPENDIX A A-7 Figure A-3. Site 16116 Feature D, TU -1 0- EAST FACE 20- aERI30 - ER 6 C so - f N T I 70 Y E T Go- a R s ^ U 100 C� LAYER 11 11 BtXML 120- 130- 1 C Igo CEN7RIETERt ROCK 10 $0 30 00 EO ROOT Figure A-3. Site 16116 Feature D, TU -1 APPENDIX A Portable remains were visible on and around this feature. An orgastic silt (c. 0.10-0.20 m thick) was observed around this feature. FEATURE E: Platform FUNCTION: Burial DIMENSIONS: 2.90 m by 2.40 m by 0.70 m DESCRIPTION: Feature E consists of a well-built, roughly square platform. All four sides are stacked and faced with easily discernible comers (especially the northwest). The platform slopes slightly to the east, and in some portions cobbles from the walls have fallen out. The east side of the feature is lower than the westside. Distance from the southwest comer of this feature to the northwest corner of Feature D is c. 8.60 m at 2500. Feature E is unaltered and is in good condition. No portable remains or cultural deposits were observed at this feature. FEATURE F: Modified outcrop FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 13.00 m by 7.00 in by 1.50 in DESCRIPTION: This long L-shaped outcrop is modified along its entire length in a variety of ways: large aligned boulders paralleling the outcrop with large cobbles and small boulders piled and filling the space between; large cobbles stacked three-four courses high against the outcrop's face, forting a unifacial wall; and a large mound made up of large and small boulders as well as cobbles piled along and in front of the outcrop. The outcrop is modified in one of these ways for is entire length. FEATURE G: Mound FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 5.20 m by 2.80 m by 0.70 in DESCRIPTION: This northeast/southwest running mound is piled over the northern end of anortheast/southwest trending and westward facing low bedrock outcrop. The eastside of the mound's piled one-two courses high, whereas the west is piled three -five courses high The peak in the middle of the mound suggests the passibility of a filled depression. Extending west is a scattered alignment which terminates on a second low bedrock outcrop a 5.0 m to the west. FEATURE H: Mound FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 2.60 m by 2.40 m by 0.50 m DESCRIPTION: This is a roughly rectangular faced mound constructed on a low outcrop. Side walls are built of small basalt boulders to heights of 40.00 to 75.00 an, of three -six courses. Thesurface is very slightly mounded and is composed of mostly large basalt cobbles, with some small to medium FE -1 cobbles. It is unaltered and in good condition. No portable remains were observed on the surface of this feature. SITE NO.: State: 16117 PBRI: 1067-36 SITE TYPE: Platform (Figure C-16) TOPOGRAPHY: Almost flat pahoehoe lava flows with exposed bedrock outcrops. VEGETATION: Kiawe, lantana, 'ilima, kuawa, vines, and guinea gam• CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation/ agriculture DIMENSIONS: 5.50 in by 5.70 in by 0.73 m (approx.) DESCRIPTION: Thesite consists ofamedium-sized platform with a small cupboard or well within. This platform is constructed of small to medium basalt boulders piled haphazardly to form most of the platform. It is sitting atop a flat bedrock outcrop. There are two piles of stones, one on each side. The one on the west appears to be a cupboard, and the one on the east may be a sort of planting box since it surrounds an opening. The south end of the platform is composed of the bedrock outcrop. There isasnallagricultural mound c. 2.00 in to the south of the platform. No portable remains were observed at this site. However, c. 0.10-0.15 m thick deposit of organic silts was observed in arras off the sides of the platform. SITE NO.: State: 16118 (Figure A-4) PHRI: 1067-34 SITE TYPE: Enclosure (Figure C-17) TOPOGRAPHY: The site sits atop a low flow ridge with a bedrock outcrop present The land slopes slightly to the south and west. VEGETATION: koa-haole, kiawe, guinea grass, and vines. CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation DIMENSIONS: 5.00 m by 4.60 m by 0.75 m (approx.) DESCRIPTION: The site consists of a single enclosure with stacked walls. Theenclosureisconstnrctedofla:ge unshaped pahoehoe cobbles and small to medium boulders. The wall of the mostly circular structure is piled or stacked four -five courses high. It is built atop a level bedrock outcrop around a small dip c. 0.35 m deep in the center. There may be a small entrance, marked by a dip in the outside wall, on the east side. This site is located just south of the northern project ares I I I I [J [] 11 I APPENDIX A A-9 Al ^ Kerr Al ..r aa,.nm• �w.. y,. l .w• ar Y w, X4 aY"' r K OPEN GRASSY AREA rAk PIP r+*µ rw .W. Aiv �711� ah, '4 STACKED WALL BEDROCK N ~x� • it ar Figure A4. Site 16118 boundary. No portable remains were observed atthis feature. However, ac. 0.10-020 m of silty organic soil was observed in pahoehoe pockets. SPIE NO.: State: 16119 PHRI: 1067-28 SITE TYPE: Terrace - (Figure C-18 and C-26) TOPOGRAPHY: Gently sloping pahoehoe flows trending to the west There are numerous bedrock outcrops in the immediate area. VEGETATION: koa-haole, lantana, kiawe, vines, and guinea grass. CONDITION: Fair INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Habitation DRAENSIONS: 19.00 m by 13.00 m by 0.62 m (approx.) DESCRIPTION: The site consists of a single terrace which is faced on the west side with a small paved area on the north- northeasL The northern portion of the terrace is constructed of small and medium basaltboulders atop a bedrock outcrop. The western edge has a low linear mound and within c. 1.00 m, the small paved area begins. It is c. 2.50 m (north -south) by 3.10 m and has an upright basalt slab (c. 0.45 to high) on the south side. The southern portion of the terrace is also on an outcrop and has medium basalt boulders and slabs in an alignment along the face, and a rough alignment running perpendicular to the long axis of the terrace. There is a small agricultural mound just to the west and a small modified outcrop off of the southwest comer. The comer pipe marked "Lot #W' is immediately south of this site. A c. 0.15-0.20 m thick deposit of organic silts was observed in bedrock pockets at this site. SITE NO.: State: 16133 (Figures A-5 and C-19) PHRE 1067-29 SITE TYPE: Complex (3 Features) TOPOGRAPHY: Roughly level, with a gradual westward descent (ocean is c. 400.00 m west). Terrain is broken up by bedrock outcrops, knobs, knolls, and ridges. VEGETATION: Thickly covered by high dry grass (California grass), lantana, kiawe, and koa-haole saplings. CONDITION: Fair • APPENDIX A A-10 CREVICE FILLED WITH COBBLES i ` u `?� r O 1, 1=ea. 4� . o! FALLEN KIAW a 517E TAO Pai TU -4 e Q Fea. B Fee. A 1t IIS b0 m to 1S ❑ TEST UNIT AA► COSILE FILL cab Z! KIAWE MMM FACED WALL ii BEDROCK - SITE 15114 Figure A-5. Site 16133 C I 1 1 1 11 C 1 1 I 1 I 1 APPENDIX A INTEGRITY: Unaltered PROBABLE AGE: Prehistoric FUNCTIONAL INTERPRETATION: Agriculture DESCRIPTION: The site complex consists of one modified outcrop (Feature A) and two terraces (Feature B and Q. The overall dimensions are c. 30.00 in, (east -west) by 25.00 in (north -south). FEATURE A: Modified outcrop FUNCTION: Retaining wall DIMENSIONS: 16.00 in by 14.00 in by 2.25 in DESCRIPTION: Feature A consists of a modified outcrop and wall. The outcrop is long, narrow and westward facing. It runs northeast -southeast and is modified by basalt cobbles piled and stacked on top of and along the face of the outcrop ridge. The ground is lower to the west. The wall extends east from the midpoint of the outcrop and nuts c. 2.00 in short of Feature B. The modified outcrop continues to Site 6337, Feature E (large wall). The result is a T-shaped feature with the stem of the T being the wall west of Feature B. There is rubble scattered throughout the area, especially west of the modified outcrop, but it is difficult to tell what feature, if any, the rubble may have come from. Feature A is located c. 16.50 in due west of Feature B, which is c. 28.00 m north-northwest of Site 1067-25 (16112), south end, and c. 10.00 in north of the stone wall (Site 6337, Feature E). The north end is c. 11.00 in south of the fence line (Site 6336) extension Feanne A is constructed of basalt cobbles stacked two -three courses high and two -three courses wide, is bi-faced and extends to the modified outcrop. Feature A is located c. 16.50 m due west of Feature B, which is a 28.00 in north-northwest of Site 16112. The south end is c. 10.00 in, north of the stone wall (Site 6337 Feature E), and the north end is c. 11.00 in south of the fence line (Site 6336) extension. Feature A is unaltered and its in fair condition. No portable remains were noted at this feature. A-11 FEATURE B: Terrace (Figure C-19) FUNCTION: Agriculture DIIIIENSIONS: 5.00 m by 5.00 m by 0.60 m DESCRIPTION: Feature B consists of a terrace. This amorphous terrace extends off of a low wide bedrock knob that is to the east -southeast -south The body of the terrace is piled, and the edges are roughly stacked (due to weathering and time rather than intended construction). Feature B is constructed of basalt cobbles stacked two-four courses high to fort a north-northwest facing retaining wall. The body of the platform is made up of basalt cobbles piled between the retaining wall and the bedrock outcrop. The terrace is paved. The face is crumbled slightly but not to the detritnent of the unit. The site tag is placed on this feature at the central - northeast side. Feature B is located c. 25.00 in north-northwest of Site 1067-25 (16112), c. 7.50 m south of Feature C, and c. 16.50 in east of the north end of Feature A. It is unaltered and in fair condition. No portable remains or cultural deposits were noted at this feature. TU -2 was placed on the central north side of this feature. FEATURE C: Terrace FUNCTION: Agriculture DIMENSIONS: 3.50 in by 3.00 in by 0.60 in DESCRIPTION: Feature C consists of a terrace that extends off of a bedrock outcrop that lies to the east The west end of the terrace is well-stacked, fort -Ling a nicely faced, west - facing retaining wall. The area between is piled basalt cobbles forming the terrace body. This terrace is paved. The terrace is constructed of basalt cobbles stacked three-four courses high from a west -facing, faced retaining wall with otherbasalt cobbles piled between the wall and the outcrop forming the terrace body. Feature C is located c. 7.50 m north of Feature B, and Site 6337 Feature D (1001-5) is c. 45.00 in. northeast at 400. Feature C is unaltered and is in good condition. No portable remains or cultural deposits were noted at this feature. 0 • B-1 HISTORICAL DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH by Lehua Kalima, B.A. The project area lies within the ahupua'a of Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii. The name Puapuaahanslatesliterally as"piglet,"becauseofthesupposed resemblance of two large rocks there to pigs (P" et al. 1974:192). Kahelo was the name of a land area in Puapuaa where horse and foot races were held in the 1880s. King Kalakaua is said to have attended them. Kahelo itself means "going to and fro" (ibid:64). Handy and Handy describe the importance of the god Lono to the Kona area: Disregarding the inconsistencies in orally transmitted lore, the point of interest with respect to Lono is that he is plainly identified with Kona, Hawaii, and is said to have introduced the main food plants, taro, sweet potato, yams, sugarcane, and bananas to Hawaii, and also 'awa. Hogs were likewise identified with Lono, but there is no mention of his having brought them to Hawaii. The fact that the Makahiki festival and the rituals for inducing rainfall and fertility centered in Kona comes outclearly in the description of theMakahiki. EARLY HISTORICAL ACCOUNTS Early accounts relevant to Puapuaa include accounts concerning the Kailua-Kona area. These accounts indicate that the high-ranking chiefs 'Umi-a-Liloa, Kalaniopu'u, and Kamehameha I lived in Kona. During the early historic period, Kailua was a preferred port as well as the center of island government. Residences of aii'i reached from Kahelo, at the makai end of Puapuaa 1st to Lanihau, north of Kailua Bay. Native historian Samuel Kamakau wrote: ....There were chiefs and families of chiefs of Oahu, Molokai, Kauai, Maui. The sands of Kaiakeakua (Kailua Bay) were worn down like a dromedary's back by the many feet of chiefs and chiefesses tramping over them, and at Kamakahonu could be seen at night the sparkle of lights reflected in the sea like diamonds, from the homes of the chiefs from Kahelo to Lanihau. The number of chiefs and lesser chiefs reached into the thousands (1961:221- 222). The earliestaccountspecific to thePuapuaa vicinity is by English missionaryWilliamEllis. EllisdescribedthePuapuaa areaasgreen and agriculturallyptoductive. Healsodescribed KauakaiakaolaHeiauwhich issituated inPuapuaa 1st. Ellis' observations are presented below: Leaving Kairua, we passed through the villages thickly scattered along the shore to the southward. The country around looked unusually green and cheerful, owing to the frequent rains, which for some months past have fallen on this side of the island. Even the barren lava, over which we travelled, seemed to veil its sterility beneath frequent tufts of tall waving grass, or spreading shrubs and flowers. The sides of the hills, laid out for a considerable extentin gardens and fields,and generally cultivated with potatoes, and other vegetables, were beautiful. The number of heiaus, and depositories of the dead, which we passed, convinced us that this part of the island must formerly have been populous. The latter were built with fragments of lava, laid up evenly on the outside, generally about eight feet long, from four to six broad, and about four feet high. Some appeared very ancient, others had evidently been standing but a few years. At Ruapua (Puapuaa) we examined an interesting heiau, calledKauaikaharoa,builtof immenseblocks of lava, and found its dimensions to be 150 fat by 70. At the north end was a smaller enclosure, sixty feet long and ten wide, partitioned off by a high wall, with but one narrow entrance. The places where the idols formerly stood were apparent, though the idols had been removed (Ellis 1963:72-73). In his catalogue of heiau throughout the islands, Thrum recorded this heiau described by Ellis: Kauaikahaola Puapua I; an early heiau, rebuilt by Kamehameha: about 170 x 75 R in size, of two divisions. Its walls yet in fair condition; entry way on seaward side (1908:43). In a 1948 article in Paradise of the Pacific, the area behind the heiau is described: Naluahine remembered the heiau as a center of village life when he was a child, for the coast was I 1 I I 1 1 APPENDIX B then inhabited by fishermen. Although the rituals of the heiau had ceased, there were still kahunas (priests) living in grass houses near the walls of the heiau. Thesekahunas were men who could foretell the time forgood fishing hauls. They continued the worship of the old fishing gods, Kuula and Hina On the flat lands above the heiau site, Naluahine said, there was a racetrack in the 1880s. Races were run there between the blooded horses of Parker ranch and other Kona ranches. The races attracted people from all over the islands, including King Kalakaua and his court. By 1900, the people of the fishing village drifted away to other places and the village of Luapua was deserted. Nothing remained except the stone walls of the heiau and the stone foundations of the village grass houses (Taylor 1948:49). Ellis goes on to describe smaller temples along the coast whichwere dedicated to Kuura andHinaby fishermen. These temples were probably fishing heiau, or Ku'ula. LAND TENURE In 1848, during the reign of Kamehameha III, the traditional Hawaiian land ownership system was replaced with a Western-style system. This radical restructuring was called The Great Mahele (division). The Great Mahele separated and defined the undivided land in terests of the King and the high-ranking chiefs, and the konohiki, who were originallythoseinchargeoftracts of Landon behalf of the king or a chief (Chinn 1958:vii and Chinen 1961:13). More than 240 of the highest-ranking chiefs and konohiki in the kingdom joined Kamehameha M in this division. The first mahelewas signed on January 27, 1848 by Kamehameha III and Princess VictoriaKamamalu,andby her guardians Mataio Kekuanaoa and Ione li. The last mahele was signed by the King and E. Enoka on March 7,1848 (Chinn 1958:16). The mahele did not convey title to any land. The chiefs and konohiki were required to present their claims to The Land Commission to receive awards for lands quitclaimed to them by Kamehameha III. They were also required to pay commutations to the government in order to receive royal patents on their awards. Until an award was issued, title remained with the government. The lands awarded to the chiefs and konohiki became known as Konohiki Lands. Because there were few surveyors in Hawaii at the time of the mahele, the lands were. identified by name only, with the understanding that the ancient boundaries would prevail until the land could be surveyed. This expedited the work of the LandCommission and speeded the transfers (Cbinen 1961:13). B-2 During this process all land was placed in one of three categories: Crown Lands (for the occupant of the throne), Government Lands, and Konohiki Lands. These were all "subject to the rights of native tenants," (Laws of Hawaii, 1848:22). Native tenants were the common Hawaiian people who lived on the land and worked it for their subsistence Questions concerning the nature of these rights began to arise as the King, the government, and konohW began selling parcels of hind. On December 21, 1849 the Privy Council attempted to clarify the situation by adopting fourresolutions intended to protect the rights of native tenants referred to in the 1849 law (Chinn 1958:29). These resolutions authorized the Land Commission to award fee simple title to all native tenants who occupied and improved any portion of Crown, Government, or Konohiki lands. These awards were to be free of commutation except for house lots located in the districts of Honolulu, Lahaina, and Hilo (ibid.). Before receiving then awards from the Land Commission, the native tenants were required to prove that they cultivated the land for a living. They were not permitted to acquire wastelands or lands which they cultivated "with the seeming intention ofenlarging theirlots." Onceaclaimwas confirmed, a survey was required before the Land Commission was authorized to issue any award. These lands becameknown as "KuleanaLands" (ibid:30). Untilits dissolution on Nlmh 3l, 1855, the Land Comm iss ion issued thousands of awards to the native tenants for their kuleana; even so, less than 30,000 acres of land were awarded to the native tenants as Kuleana Lands. When the Great Mahele took place in 1848, 19 Land Commission Awards (LCAs) were granted within thelAndof Puapuaa Puapuaa 2nd was granted to Wm. C. Lunalilo as LCA 8559-B. Although none of these awards are in the projectarea areviewoftestimoniesforawards granted inthis ahupua' a indicate that a large number of kihapai (cultivated parcels, usually in taro or sweet potatoes) and houselots existed there. Silva states that Puapuaa "was a populous and productive residential area, apparently self-sufficient, with abundant ocean and agricultural resources" (1985:A-7). A comparison of ahupua'a boundaries between the USGS map and Copies of Surveys and Maps of Lands Belonging to the Estate ofLunalilo indicates thatPuapuaa 1st and 2nd were also known as Puapua'aiki and Puapua`anui respectively. Figure B -I is a portion of a tracing of the Kailua Section ofNorth Kona made in the late 1920s by J.S. Emerson. Note 0 NrV °b/E d P L Oona e.7 P2ek.; P/ U 4 Gb CGr/f r37 - -- .��uhwkeee br.l�« LSOKOUP .'A. p, L Q Lelyg 6. P• 51z !t'�..� _�.. �u / —.. F N P I� �' o L — — — I_ . A h a .G ..- - J. U vane/•- ,n h• tirr'1113 l �. I•CA,..I .367 W^IA"- /rc "AAm. H A- M4� ., or 9es 1 rr. Nirhe ..--./ - __ _ '�- \ 60vernrn,n7 c �j Nee MvPen] lE,l n' -�-a uraiF„ -� --• ----A-- _- , Br 922 -.� P i .�WIt _ of ,a �• h.una P.� ��-XvhiP.r^r Y:� rNr<Gh l /7aa ._ �.. l --BGS: '• 4r ]rtelM.rec/,er- •O.,v.. t,.,,�,;, l �. I•CA,..I .367 W^IA"- /rc "AAm. H A- A -. __ , d ;n A' ihu/vi- Pohaelrerr bnnl LN7 . u elm .. . _ Nee MvPen] lE,l .. / Or-29GI Qir�r� . -. --.. �'-"— ByIG u i _ 2 Ger!' 15 9 J HAWAII TERRITORY SU RV E`( K+ohnluiE=rr K A H U L CO. T.Y Awena, Surveyor _� KAILUA, SECTION PaPifir p/ ! I' Kahe%-'C'q qp8 '' NORTH ICON A r HAWA I t Papsa/es F/, r P UA PUAA N''I% .1—/ 955T8 Lumllle - Survcu and Map by J.5.Emarxn LCA• u AP l 7719 1�n f C.A. Ahnruha/e PA LOA _-li )- i!A IOiMlle/ 770 V,00,24 's_.�O.W ♦'•JIY�-.. `Ije/..�Certl r lea ,rc]� LC.A . ifs 273 ra — �•^2a L o 7 hm — 3,-- L p A i� O Leleioh ./' 1 �r1571 lfoolawalwL ..>j�—o.. _ - L V ��' 9971 L.GA. J/ea �1 vele Iprren A L -- N1 A – o M• ,y/�/ K _-.—.. p7,�.ryf, ti'ekauonehi Figure B-1. Portion of the Kailua Section of North Kona in the /ate 1920s, by J.S. Emerson (From a 1952 tracing by Herman X Aki; State Survey Office, Reg. Map No. 1280) �Z b w If • 0 APPENDIX B the presence of the Kuakini Wall crossing through the ahupua'a mauka of the present project area and the location of Kahelo, the racetrack area, which lies north of the project area but close to the coastal road, as the project area lies close to Alii Drive. On a Certificate of Boundaries, dated March 4, 1885 for Puapua'anui is written, "e H.N. Greenwell, ka mea nova keia aina is manawa," (to H.N. Greenwell, for whom the land is for at this time). Another reference is found at the Bureau for 1891. In Book 120, page387, Grantor J.S. Antonio, regarding interest in leasehold and fixtures in Puapua'anui: ...in consideration of the cancellation and surrender to me of my note of $1,000 to Greenwell ... and for $1...I hereby transfer ... all of my right...in and to the leasehold premises called Puapuaanui, together with the fixtures and appurtenances but to no portion of the furniture, dairy fixtures or appurtenances, cattle or other livestock, which I will reserve the right to remove. From this entry we can conclude that there was a dairy in the area during the late 1800s. The project area is within zone known as the KonaField System, alargeagricultural strip that extended from Kaawaloa, South Kona, to beyond the back of Kailua Town, North Kona, B-4 a distance of 13 miles. T. Stell Newman did extensive documentary research on the area and noted its importance: The Kona Field System is without equal in Hawaii, and probably in the nation in terms of the extensiveness of a prehistoric modification of the land ...It is a physical demonstration of the highly developedfamting economy of ancient Hawaii and illustrates the complexity and advanced state of aboriginal Hawaiian culture ....thephysicalremains aresufficiently well preservedand in such generally good condition that they may still be detected on the ground...In all, itis a magnificent monument to the exhaustive labors and industry of the ancient Hawaiians (Newman 1970:126). The Kona Field System is registered in the Hawaii Register of Historic Places and has been deemed eligible for the National Register. By the mid- to late 1800s, as western contact drastically altered traditional Hawaiian land -use practices, and as epidemics from introduced diseases greatly reduced the native population, the Kona Field System fell into disuse. Except for small individually owned farms and Large coffee plantations near Captain Cook and Kealakekua, traditional farming was replacedby ranching. Dependence on ranching, coffee cultivation, and small-scale fainting continued until the late 1950s when economic emphasis shifted toward developing the tourist industry. 0 0 t APPENDIX B B-5 I REFERENCES CITED I Board of Commissioners ' 1929 Indices of Awards made by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Star ' Bulletin Press, Honolulu. Chinen, J.J. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. , 1961 Original Land Titles in Hawaii. Privately published Ellis, W. 1963 Journal of William Ellis. Honolulu: Advertiser Publishing Co., Ltd Kamakau, S.M. 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Newman, T.S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing andFarming on the Island of Hawaii in A.D. 1778. State of Hawaii, Dept. Land and Natural Resources, Div. State Parks. Silva, C.L. 1985 Appendix A: IN Walker and Rosendahl: Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kahakai Development Project Area, Lands of Puapuaa 1st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii TMK: 3-7-5-20:1 PHRI Report 141-111984. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. Taylor, C.B. 1948 The Restoration of a Heiau. Paradise of the Pacific Holiday Edition:46-49,125. Thrum, T.G. 1908 List of Heiaus. The Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1908. Honolulu: T.G. Thrum. 1908 Tales from the Temples. The Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1908. Honolulu: T.G. Thrum. I G1 ' APPENDIX C ' Information to Upgrade Original Inventory Survey This appendix includes the following information to upgrade the current report to current inventory - level standards: I. Summary of archaeological work conducted subsequent to the fieldwork for the initial inventory survey (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992); 2. A review of the present status of significance assessments and general mitigation ' treatments for all sites for which further archaeological work (data recovery and/or preservation) remains to be done; ' 3. A discussion of revisions to Table 10 (General Significance Assessments and Recommended Treatments) of the (Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl 1992) initial report; ' 4. A discussion of settlement patterns and predicted site patterns for the project area; and ' 5. Additional figures, including selected photographs of sites and features, and additional site plan maps (at end). SUBSEQUENT ARCHAEOLOGICAL WORK ' Since the fieldwork and draft report for the current project was completed in 1992, two archaeological inventory surveys and an archaeological mitigation program have taken place near and or partially within .the current project boundaries: (a) Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program (Haun et al. 1998); (b) Archaeological Inventory Survey of Two Parcels in HSlualoa 2nd and 3rd (Wolforth 2000); and (c) Archaeological Inventory Survey, Walua Apartment Project (Corbin 2001). During the Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program (Haun et al. 1998) 177 sites with 1,548 features ' were identified in the project area. Most sites had been identified during previous work. Fifty-eight sites were assigned a permanent habitation function. Four of these sites were also assigned a burial function, and two of the four were assigned a ceremonial function as well. A temporary habitation function was assigned ' to 28 sites. Of these, four were also assigned a burial function, one was assigned a ceremonial function, and two were assigned a burial/ceremonial function. The most common non -habitation site function was agriculture (40 sites), followed by ranching (livestock control; 16), ahupua'a boundary (14); burial (11), ' transportation (7), and water catchment (1). The 1,584 features had the following functions: agriculture (1,029 features), permanent habitation (306), burial (53), temporary habitation (43), livestock control (30), religious or ceremonial (15), marker (14), ahupua'a boundary (14), transportation (12), storage (3), water catchment (2), communication (2), and recreation (1). Three features were assigned a temporary habitation ' and burial function. The function of 21 features was undetermined. C-2 During the archaeological inventory survey of the Two Parcels in H61ualoa 2nd and 3rd project area, seven sites with 26 features were recorded: one heiau (Site 3829), three residential sites (5600, 6317, 6374), and three walls (6316, 6340, 21391). Site 5600 consisted of a wall, two midden deposits, three platforms, a terrace/pavement, five enclosures, two pahoehoe outcrops with bedrock mortars, a burial cave, and a papamu. Functional interpretations included habitation, recreation, boundary enclosures, house floor pavement, recreation, and boundary walls. Sites 6316 and 6340 were ahupua'a boundary walls. Site 6317 consisted of an enclosure, a wall, and a platform functioning for permanent habitation. Site 6374 consisted of an enclosure, three platforms, a mound, a modified outcrop, and a terrace all functioning for permanent habitation. Site 21391 was an enclosure wall. During the archaeological inventory survey for the Walua Apartment Project, 27 sites were identified. Eight of the 27 had been previously identified during an earlier inventory survey that covered a portion of the current project area (Head et al. 1994). Nineteen sites consisting of 22 features were newly identified. Seven of these sites were tested. The 22 features comprised the following formal types: modified outcrops (8), walls (5), enclosure (1), terrace (1), platform (2), lava blister cave (1), rock alignment (1), shrine (1), paved area (1), and papamu (1). REIDENTIFICATION OF PREVIOUSLY IDENTIFIED FEATURES During the fieldwork for the additional inventory survey for the current project, it was discovered that several features of Site 6325, identified during the Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program (Haun et al. 1998), were actually within the current project boundary. The features, which are near the northeast boundary of the project area (see Figure 2 of the main test), had apparently not been recorded because they were thought to be outside the project area. The features include: E (E-1, E-2), J, K, L, M, N, and O. These features are described in detail below, and are shown in plan view in Figure C-20. All of these additional features have been described, mapped, and photographed, while Feature K was tested. These features have been assessed under Criteria D as important for information content. No further work is recommended for these features (Haun et al. 1998). Feature El: Enclosure Function: Habitation Dimensions: 7.00 by 4.40 by 0.65 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered Description: This enclosure is oval in plan view and has an entrance in the middle of the southeast wall. It is built entirely on an outcrop that is 60-70 cm higher than the surrounding ground surface. The walls of the enclosure are built of basalt boulders 25-50 cm in diameter and are mostly collapsed. In the most intact section, boulders are stacked four courses high, with larger stones on the bottom; the lower courses are two boulders wide, and the upper are three stones wide. In another fairly well preserved wall section there are large boulders on the bottom outside of the enclosure, and smaller stones on the inside with large boulders stacked on top. The floor of the enclosure is flat bedrock. Feature E2: Terrace Function: Possible Habitation Dimensions: 10.00 by 2.60 by 1.00 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered 1 I I I 1 I I 0 C-3 Description: On the southwest end of the Feature E enclosure is a roughly constructed wall built on an outcrop. This wall extends southward for about 10.0 in and is 1.0-1.5 in wide by c. 1.0 in high. The first 4.0 in of the wall defines a terrace, flat on top, with the terrace face toward the west. The remaining portion of the feature less formally constructed. Feature J: Modified outcrop Function: Agriculture Dimensions: 9.00 by 3.00 by 0.75 in Condition: Good Integrity: Unaltered Description: This feature consists of an outcrop, generally linear in plan view, modified with large boulders (40-60 cm in diameter). The boulders have been piled on the southeast end of the outcrop; the rest of the outcrop is bare. Feature K: Enclosure Function: Habitation Dimensions: 7.60 by 6.00 by 0.80 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered Description: Feature K is an enclosure. The southeast wall is 80 cm high and is built on an outcrop that is 2.0 in wide. Much of the wall is made of outcrop; the rest is large boulders. The southwest and northeast walls are 25-80 cm high. These walls are built with boulders, 30-80 cm in diameter and are stacked 1-2 courses high. The walls are collapsed and are 1.20-1.40 in wide. The northwest wall consists of a single row of boulders, except at the north comer, where it spreads into two rows -wide, and the west comer, where it is stacked two courses high and two rows wide. There is no bedrock under this wall. Inside the enclosure, in the east comer, is a smaller enclosure c. 1.0 in square. There is also an alignment of three flat boulders near the northeast corner. There is an opening.in the northeast wall, near the north comer; this may have been an entrance. No portable remains were found at the feature. A 1.0 by 1.0 in test unit (TU -1320-33) was placed in the east comer of the enclosure, in a small space bounded on two sides by the enclosure walls and by single stone alignments on the other two sides (Figure C-2/). The unit was excavated in a single 12-28 cm thick layer of cobbly silt loam (0-28 cmbs). Inspection of the profile, revealed that the base of the architecture rested within the upper zone of the Layer I soils. Excavation of the unit was terminated at bedrock, and no cultural materials or evidence of human skeletal remains were recovered. Feature L: Modified outcrop Function: Agriculture Dimensions: 7.40 by 2.00 by 0.80 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered Description: This feature, irregular in plan view, consists of stones piled on an outcrop. The stones are C. 30-50 cm in diameter. Some of the stones at the feature appear to have broken off the outcrop. Feature M: Terrace Function: Agriculture Dimensions: 2.60 by 1.80 by 1.00 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered Description: This terrace is oval in plan view and is constructed of piled boulders and cobbles 15-30 cm in diameter. The terrace retaining wall is partially collapsed; where it hasn't collapsed, it is three courses high and may have originally been faced. C -a Feature N: Modified outcrop Function: Agriculture Dimensions: 3.10 by 2.20 by 0.60 in Condition: Fair Integrity: Unaltered Description: Feature N is irregular in plan view and consists of boulders, 30-40 cm in diameter, piled informally, 1-3 courses high, on an outcrop. Feature O: Mound Function: Agriculture Dimensions: 3.00 by 1.60 by 0.85 in Condition: Good Integrity: Unaltered Description: Feature O is oval in plan view and consists of boulders informally piled 2-3 courses high on an outcrop. The boulders are 30-40 cm in diameter. SETTLEMENT PATTERN FOR THE PROJECT AREA AND VICINITY Settlement Pattern Previous to the Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl (1992) Survey Prior to the Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl (1992) survey, archaeological work within the project area and vicinity included investigations by Ching et al. (1973), Soehren (1978), Hommon and Rosendahl (1983), and Walker and Rosendahl (1985). Ching's findings during the survey of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridor included wall shelters, a platform, walls, and U-shaped shelters. These features functioned as habitation areas, possible burials, and boundary walls (Ching et al 1973). Soehren (1978) noted a possible burial on the subject property, while Hommon and Rosendahl identified habitation features and two additional possible burial features on the subject property (Hommon and Rosendahl 1983: field records). Walker and Rosendahl (1985) assigned boundary functions to some previously recorded sites within the project area; outside the area, habitation enclosures, terraces, modified outcrops, platforms, boundary walls, burial mounds, C -and U -shapes, cave shelters, and agricultural mounds were recorded. Other archaeological work near the project area by Dye (1978), Harnmatt (1980), Welch (1982), Landrum at al. (1995), and Robins et al. (1990) also found sites and features having these functions. In general, these findings substantiate the historical record and early historical accounts, which picture this area as heavily populated, with vast agricultural tracts laid out with boundary walls, burial areas, and habitation structures. Several major heiau also existed in the vicinity (Walker and Rosendahl 1985: Appendix A). 1 0 0 C-5 ' Settlement Pattern Established to the Present Day Since the fieldwork for the Head, Goodfellow, and Rosendahl (1992) survey was undertaken in 1991, ' several investigations, referred to above in the Subsequent Archaeological Work section, have taken place on or near the current subject property. These projects have revealed the presence of the feature types mentioned above, and have additionally substantiated the conclusions regarding prehistoric and historic ' settlement patterns, i.e., that Kailua-Kona was prehistorically and historically a heavily populated area with numerous residences, temporary and permanent habitations, agricultural areas with boundary walls and terraces, burials, shrines, and heiau. Indicated also is the fact that many prehistoric agricultural boundary walls were used and added onto into the historic period during cattle controlling and ranching activities. The following is a detailed summary of the present-day, established settlement pattern for the general vicinity. The summary is based on several settlement models generated by researchers such as Cordy ' (1985, 1995, 2000), Newman (1970), Kelly (1983), and others. Though differing in detail, these models generally divide up the region into five basic environmental zones: the Shoreline, Kula, Kaluulu, 'Apa'a, and 'Ama'u. tShoreline This zone extends, typically, from the high -tide line inland approximately 200 meters or 600+ feet. In Kailua this is the area from the shore to approximately Alii Drive. Thus, the shoreline zone's eastern extent is the western edge of the current project area. In this zone, permanent settlement began c. AD 1000-1200 (Cordy 2000:248). Several large and densely populated royal centers were situated at several locations along the shoreline between Kailua and H6naunau (Cordy 1985;1995) — at Kailua, H61ualoa, Kahalu'u, and Kealakekua (Cordy 2000:248). These centers included dwellings for rulers, chiefs, and the supporting populace, places of refuge, and other structures. Also present are large and small heiau, sporting ' areas, and burial clusters. Burials are present in caves, within finely built platforms, rock mounds, and houses in the shoreline, and are more often to be found in the near -shore Kula zone (Cordy 1995; Haun et al. 1998; Schilt 1984; Tainter 1973). Fishing and farming, of course, were the major economic activities in this zone. Farming was done in clearings in the forest uplands where annual rainfall was sufficient for reliable crops, probably at the ca. 900 to 1,000 ft elevation, which corresponds to the 40 -inch rainfall line. Trails facilitated movement between the shoreline and the upper regions. Kula This zone, which includes the current project area, consists primarily of dry and open land with few trees and considerable grass cover. Soil development is limited, with a fair amount of exposed lava bedrock. The zone was planted primarily in scattered sweet potato patches. However, behind Kailua, breadfruit, taro, and forest banana were also grown (Cordy 2000:255), at least in the historic period. Use of this zone appears to have occurred as early as c. AD 1000-1300s. It is considered to extend to the 500 ft elevation mark, although it may extend further, to approximately the 600-800 ft elevation (the 40-50 inch rainfall line). Archaeologically, this contains clearing mounds, terraces, small soil clearings, and planting pits. Some permanent habitations are found, but at a much lower density than at the shore. Permanent habitation in this zone may have first started in the AD 1400's to 1500's, at least in the nearby ahupua'a of Pua'a (Cordy 2000:255). Kolu`ulu This zone is also referred to as the breadfruit zone. It is located immediately above the Kula zone. Early explorers described this zone as planted in breadfruit, with sweet potatoes and wauke (paper mulberry) planted underneath the breadfruit trees (cf. Menzies 1920:75-76). The zone may have been perhaps one-half mile wide (Kelly 1983:62). Here walled fields occur at the 600-800 ft elevation. 0 V C-6 •Apa•a In historic accounts this zone is described as an area divided by low stone and earth walls into cleared rectangular fields in which sweet potato and dryland taro were planted. On the edges of the walls, sugarcane and ti were planted (cf. Menzies 1920:75-76). Also, bananas and wauke were present (cf. Ellis 1963:32). Newman estimated that this zone began at the 1,000 ft elevation and extended to the 2,500 ft elevation, although recent archaeological research has found formal walled fields beginning more commonly at the 600-800 ft elevation. In reality, it has been found that there is much zonal variation within the Kona Field System (cf. Cordy 1985:10-13). `Ama`u This is the banana zone, which may extend from the 2,000 ft elevation to 3,000 ft. The zone is characterized by bananas and plantains being grown in cleared forest areas. Chronology Established to the Present Day The Kona Field System was not brought to Kona as a fully developed system. Rather, it grew out of, and integrated with, the evolving socio-political structure and increasing population in the island chain. The first inhabitants of Hawai' i Island probably arrived by at least AD 600 and occupied the windward side of the island (Burtchard 1993; Kirch 1985; Hommon and Rosendahl 1986). To date, there is no archaeological evidence for occupation of the Kona region during this initial, or Colonization (AD 300 to 600), stage of island occupation. There is also little indication that during the subsequent period, Early Expansion (AD 600 to 1100), much activity was taking place in Kona (Burtchard 1993: Table 3-3). 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 to fish and collect other resources (Cordy 1995). By the latter half of the Early Expansion Period, permanent habitation was beginning in Kona (Cordy 1981, 1995; Schilt 1984). Habitation was concentrated along the shoreline and lowland slopes, and informal fields were probably situated in the Kula zone and higher elevations, areas with the higher rainfall. Agricultural fields and habitation areas expanded across the slopes and coastal area of Hualalai during the Late Expansion Period (AD 1100 to 1400) (Burtchard 1993; Cordy 1995). The earliest fields may have been located in the southern portion of the system (Schilt 1984; Wolforth and Rosendahl 1998), with new fields expanding northward over time (Haun et al. 1998). The development of the extensive formal walled fields sometime during the initial stages of the Intensification Period (AD 1400 to 1600) is taken as a mark of the initiation of the Kona Field System (Schilt 1984). The development of formal walled fields may be in part a by-product of the need to extract more subsistence resources from an increasingly limited agricultural base. The population in Kona increased dramatically during this period. Radiocarbon dates from habitation structures, shelter caves, and agricultural soils are plentiful from this period (Burtchard 1995; Haun et al. 1998; Schilt 1984). During this period, the stratified chiefdom structure becomes clearly developed in the archaeological record. Large residential complexes and heiau reflect the segregation of places and power for the growing hierarchy of 0 0 C-7 high and lower chiefs, and ceremonial stewards (Cordy 1981; Haun et al. 1998; Hommon and Rosendahl 1986). The produce from the formal walled fields was distributed to higher chiefs through a hierarchy of lower chiefs responsible for management and collection of the cultivated and wild resources. ' By the time of the Competition Period (AD 1600 to 1800), the chiefly centers and larger heiau were in place, reflecting the growth in power of the rulers and chiefs in the region (Barrera 1971; Hamman and Folk 1980). Resources may have reached their maximum carrying capacity, resulting in social stress between neighboring groups. Hostility between groups is reflected archaeologically with the development of refuge caves during this period (Schilt 1984). This volatile period was probably accompanied by internal rebellion and territorial annexation (Hommon and Rosendahl 1986; Kirch 1985). The population at this time continued to grow up to the time of European contact (Burtchard 1993). Afterwards, up to time of ' the last of the ruling chiefs (1800 to 1819), settlement and land use patterns are primarily the same as previously. But the next period, the period of the merchants and missionaries, 1820 to 1847, saw the introduction of foreign ideas, plants, animals, diseases, religion, and trade, and the end of the kapu system. ' The royal centers were no longer functioning as focal points for religious and political activity, and the population at the royal centers and the population of the commoners dropped overall. During the next period, the Great Mahele and Its Legacy, 1848-1899, the implementation of privately owned land resulted in major changes to the settlement and land use patterns in Kona. By the end of this period, foreign ' landowners and business people had greater control over broad land use practices. The upland agricultural fields were modified to coffee growing, and permanent habitations were built with modern materials upland and along the shore. The population, due to disease, reached a low during this period, but began to climb as ' foreign laborers and more business people arrived. Finally, during the last period 1900-1959, the Territorial Period, the population remained relatively stable and lowland occupation was concentrated in the small villages of Kailua and Keauhou, with permanent residences with gardens and pens scattered along the shoreline, while upland habitation was associated with agricultural and ranching pursuits (Haun et al. ' 1998). The current project is situated in the Kula zone. The current findings substantiate what is currently ' archaeologically known concerning the settlement pattern of this zone. Current research indicates that within the Kula zone were agricultural clearing mounds, walls, terraces, and planting pits. Current investigations within the project area reveal that walls, clearing mounds, terraces, and planting pits also exist. However, although some permanent habitations are thought to occur in this zone, none are thought to exist within the current project area. Concerning temporal use of the project area, radiocarbon age determinations fall within currently accepted early and late parameters with the exception of Feature D at ' Site 6377, a platform, the age date range of which, AD 680-1170, is wide, and which, if correct, may demonstrate at least temporary occupation of the site at an unusually early date. Thus, this investigation of the project area has added chronological data that contributes to the refinement of the present archaeological chronology for this area of Kona. I REVIEW OF THE PRESENT STATUS OF SIGNIFICANCE ' ASSESSMENTS AND GENERAL MITIGATION TREATMENTS ' As part of the current project, a review of general significance assessments and recommended treatments for all sites identified in the project area was conducted. The review has resulted in no changes to the original significance assessments made in 1991. In addition, the significance table in the original report has been revised to reflect current evaluation criteria (see pages 39 and 40). As noted, several ' features of Site 6325, identified during the AIN Highway Phased Mitigation Program (Haun et al. 1998), were found to be within the current project boundary. These features have been assessed as important for information content only, and no further work has been recommended for these features (Haun et al. 1998). 1p • NOTE ON BULLDOZED FEATURE During the fieldwork for the additional inventory survey conducted by PHRI on July 18 and 19, 2003 (see preface for details of the survey), Site 16113, identified during the original inventory survey in 1991, was relocated. When a search for the individual features of the site was made, Feature B of the site could not be found. It appeared that Feature B had been destroyed by bulldozing, as the area of the feature was grubbed and filled with loose stones. REFERENCES CITED Barrera, W., Jr. 1971 Archaeological Excavations and Survey at Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for Kamehameha Development Corporation. 1978 Archaeological Surface Survey of the Old Gomes Property Belonging to Pacific Basin Resorts, Inc., Kahului, Kona, Hawaii Island. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii. Prepared for Gerald Park. Burtchard, G.C. 1993 Population and Land Use on the Keauhou Coast: The Mauka Land Inventory Survey, Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii Island. IARII Draft Report prepared for Belt, Collins and Associates. 1995 Population and Land -use on the Keahou Coast, the Mauka Lands Inventory Survey, Keauhou, North Kona, Hawaii Island, Part I: Narrative Volume. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. (IARII). Submitted to Belt, Collins, and Associates and Kamehameha Investment Corporation. Ching, FXW., E. Neller, S.L. Palama, and P.B. Griffin 1973 The Archaeology of North Kona, from Ahupua`a of Kahului to the Ahupua`a of Kahaluu. Surface Survey: Realignment of Alii Drive. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc., Hawaiian Archaeological Journal 73-2. Corbin, A.B. 2001 Archaeological Inventory Survey Walua Apartment Project, Land of Waiaha 1, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5:18:7). Report 2086-030101. PHRI. Submitted to Maryl Group, Inc. Cordy, R. 1985 Working Paper I: Hawaii Island Archaeology, Ooma and Kalaoa Ahupua`a, Kekaha, North Kona (TMK:7-3). Historic Sites Section, Division of State Parks, Department of Land and Natural Resources. 1995 Central Kona Archaeological Settlement Patterns. State Historic Preservation Division, DLNR, State of Hawaii. Prepared for the Planning Department, County of Honolulu. 1 C-9 ' 2000 Exalted Sits the Chief the Ancient History ofHawai'i Island. Mutual Publishing ' Dye, T. 1978 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of Four Alternative Sites for the Bishop Kailua-Keauhou Elementary School. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Museum, Honolulu, Ms. 031078. ' Ellis, W. 1963 Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of a Tour of Hawaii, or Owhyee... Honolulu: Advertiser Publishing Co. ' H.H. Hammatt, 1980 Archaeological Survey of a Shoreline Property, TMK:7-5-20:22,34, Puapua'a, Kona, Hawaii Island. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii Report 14-158.1. Prepared ' for McClad Enterprises Ltd. Hammatt, H.H., and W. M. Folk 1980 Archaeological Survey, Phase 1: Portions of Keauhou-Kona Resort, Keauhou and ' Kahaluu, Kona, Hawaii Island. Archaeological Research Center Hawaii, Inc. Report 14-177 IL 1. Prepared for Kamehameha Investment Corp. Haun, A. E., J. D. Henry, J. A. Jimenez, M. A. Kirkendall, K. Maly, and T. R. Wolforth 1998 Alii Highway Phased Mitigation Program Phase I - Archaeological Intensive Survey, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii, vol. 1, Summary. Report 1320- 052798. PHRI. Submitted to County of Hawaii c/o R.M. Towill Corporation. Head, J.A., 1992 S.T. Goodfellow, and P.H. Rosendahl Archaeological Inventory Survey, Alii Drive Family Housing Project. Land of Puapua`a 2nd, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-20:71,72). PHRI Report 1067-092691. Prepared for CRL Development, Inc. 1994 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Ali'i Drive Sewer Project, Land of Pua'a 2ntl and 3'd and Waiaha I' and 2n", North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:7-5-18:7,8). ' PHRI Report 937-080894. Prepared for M & E Pacific. Hommon, R.J., and P.H. Rosendahl 1983 Archaeological Investigation of the Alii Drive Realignment Corridors, North Kona, Island of Hawaii. Science Management, Inc. Prepared for Belt, Collins & Associates. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. IN Kirch, P.V. (ed.), Island Societies: Archaeo- t logical Approaches to Evolution and Trans formation: 55-88. Cambridge: University Press. ' Kelly, M. 1983 Na Mala O Kona: Gardens of Kona. A History of Land Use in Kona, Hawaii. Departmental Report Series 83-2. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop ' Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for the Department of Transportation, State of Hawaii. Kennedy, J. 1990 Inventory Survey for TMK:7-8-14:35, Located at Kahalu`u, North Kona, Hawaii. ' Prepared for Mr. Art Nebu by J. Kennedy. 1 - - 1 C-10 Kirch, P.V. 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Landrum, J. (III), A.E. Haun, and P.H. Rosendahl 1995 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Test Excavations, Kahakai Development. Project Area, Lands of Puapuaa 1 st and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3- 7-20:1). PHRI Report 157-070185. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction and Wilson Okamoto & Associates. (With K. Delimont) Menzies, A. 1920 Hawaii Nei, 128 Years Ago. Edited by William F. Wilson. Honolulu: The New Freedom Press. Newman, T.S. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii in A.D. 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of State Parks. Robins, J., P.O. Walsh, M. Heidel, and H.H. Hammatt 1994 Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 5 -Acre Parcel in Puapua`a 2, North Kona, Hawaii (TMK:7-5-20:70). Cultural Surveys Hawaii, Inc. Prepared for Eric von Platen Luder and Keith F. Unger. Schilt, R. 1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kona, Hawaii. An Archaeological Study of the Kuakini Highway Realignment Corridor. Departmental Report Series 84-1. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for the Department of Transportation, State of Hawaii. Soehren, L.J. 1978 An Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey of a Portion of Puapuaa, North Kona, Hawaii. Project 78-06. Tainter, J.A. 1973 The Social Correlates of Mortuary Patterning at Kaloko, North Kona, Hawaii. Archaeology and Physical Anthropology. In Oceania 11:91-105. Walker, A.T., and P.H. Rosendahl 1985 Full Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Kahakai Development Project Area, Puapuaa 1 at and 2nd, North Kona, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-5-20:1). PHRI Report 141-111984. Prepared for KG (Hawaii) Construction. Welch, D.J. 1982 Archaeological Survey and Excavations of the Kahakai (Kailua-Keauhou) Elementary School Site, North Kona, Hawaii. Ms. 051082, Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Prepared for State of Hawaii, Division of Public Works, Department of Accounting and General Services. 0 0 c-11 Wolforth, T.R., and P.H. Rosendahl 1998 Interim Report Archaeological Inventory Survey 60 -Acre Agricultural Zoned QLT Parcel, Land of Keahuolu, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-7-4- 08:Por.1). PHRI Report 1854-010897. Prepared for Queen Liliuokalani Trust c/o Belt Collins Hawaii. Wolforth, T.R, J.D. Henry, and R.B. Rechtman 1999 Archaeological Inventory Survey of Two Parcels in H61ualoa 2nd and 3'd: Settlement Distribution near the Shoreline at H61ualoa Bay, Lands of H6lualoa 2nd and 3r°, North Kona, Island of Hawai'i (TMK: 3-7-7-4:22 and 47). Report 1941-092500. PHRI. Submitted to Ralph Berezan, Langley, B.C., Canada. 0 0 C-12 Additional Figures Selected Photographs Figure C-1. Site 6335, Wall C-13 Figure C-2. Site 6336, Wall C-14 Figure C-3. Site 6337, Feature C, View to West -Southwest C -IS Figure C-4. Site 6337, Feature D, Platform, View to West -Southwest C-16 Figure C -S. Site 16111, Feature C, Windmill Platform, View to North C-17 Figure C-6. Site 16112, Feature A (Wall), Feature B (Mound), View to South -Southwest C-18 Figure C-7. Site 16113, Feature A, Enclosure, View to East -Northeast • C-19 Figure C-8. Site 16113, Feature B, C -shape, View to West -Northwest • C-20 Figure C-9. Site 16114, Terrace, View to West -Northwest C-21 Figure C-10. Site 16115, Feature E, Enclosure, View to East C-21 FigureC-11. Site 1611S, Feature E, Enclosure, TU -1, Post Excavation • C-13 Figure C-12. Site 16116, Feature A, Mound, View to North -Northwest • C-24 Figure C-13. Site 16116, Feature B, Upright and Mound, View to East -Northeast C -2S Figure C-14. Site 16116, Feature C, Mound, View to North -Northwest C-26 Figure C -IS. Site 16116, Feature D, Platform, View to North -Northwest C-27 (board incorrectly reads Feature B) Figure C-16. Site 16117, Platform, View to North -Northeast C-28 Figure C-17. Site 16118, Enclosure • C-29 Figure C-18. Site 16119, Terrace, Northwest Corner, West Face, View to East -Southeast • C-30 Figure C-19. Site 16133, Feature B, Terrace, View to East -Southeast • C-31 Additional Drawings Figure C-20. Plan View of Site 6325 • C-32 Figure C-21. Site 6315, Feature K, TU -1320-33, East Face Profile • C-33 Figure C-21. Site 6337, Feature B C-34 Figure C-23. Site 6337, Feature C C -3S Figure C-24. Site 6337, Feature D C-36 Figure C-15. Site 15108 • C-37 Figure C-26. Site 16119, Feature A C-38 �• •� ` c r -- 835 12 if • 41 ...'�, E > Fij t c f. 't "�'`—. . _ ,a,., Y:=. t 4 �- {� 6 V��I .., / v ri `. � "6 -,� �`'+� r1t k •'L.� F V� cs t^ !J :- .� '• ' t'. ' it -]''3 - r ao-s -: �t C i 6i i -:. tx i t � x > t � l •� N o"A wee-. a+ , -�•-•` •. . ' •:• , - + , Uf � .�- -�y cam` - . ' j .�'.• ; v- c :'� �T-r rr '` ' � +. •,, -4 �..- ,a''� ._'9. � �"r /• �._ ` !w . y':, .. '. •' • •.c _ • J + •tom •��. .� t 7, s ,. �" \. '4 r To - ^ - . s «":n is � .... - R - '-� _..,. - • � r -• r P'.>•� s •.�.. rk_`�i'3ill"q�r7.Y ... �,4:` s A - - �'._�•�'.� ♦ -.r :� g - e- j a^ vc- { `sa.:. k `.r t E -. r Y'.,j . i f♦ ♦:: f q,:,a°♦ -:- x �- ,: ► .i .i` ' S `v i. +,' a. r'1 -• r % T � ' Y .t r!i y,iY 1_" tom•. ;�+ �'�, x '�� ems`�.e. 1.1Ls _•'� tl ♦.,+1 t' lN-M i e :,,in+'4�L� : **- 4 +c f i J F v pi •. Sti .ec a. :.� ♦ ♦ �" i ,; ♦ ± „�, s se r� f i� •.rJ F � ,, F f `=3V.~ F{♦M1. f�: fir, i- * •��.,cam �. r 1y1.F; � � s Frr'a• � � c "�'.r�r.�� : '� �' fr .c#' i. F =�.� k. ♦ G:.� a t. �.i 1,�' J 1+ _e,r r. .f ♦ _ .yf R ; .'€..-t�'a y }, { i r.. � � ,�..n �}i.c i .s 1 1 �' 3 Yy • ]" �' it- : Y. r� �t �.'.. �y i '� t 3" il.4 • d. a r v Y, �,� 2'._ �. s,; z £t z .. P ► h r y - « i, fj ► b r :a . 4 Y,� s a ° �# �' t .'.a t. ' f cad .T� :sl .: 4 r ♦M_� { .>t� r�11 ! _ j. t5. �y :�1 z rg� "♦-! f a SiiK, �.,�c,Ss f 1 }y.,'�x �. �' ..,F `' ; . J • Y Y .r. > i i � . s +Ya j '�"4 � � � 7'rs, �i •' Sr r r a .t a. F 5 ' r ; .y o<. i r :4F ` {Y t F .yk t' < i ; r fin; i > 1 r' ` a , T t • K ♦e f `+Jt t rr ^ r�r:. �c ,$a t ", 2 a ,;. :+" f { •t F �, r .� � ♦ f � yr, s ,� f.;� ,r . ry t _ ; f - 1'�: h "`} � °" r'` � ?'7';. .41 i i l { T 1 k `+a.E �' Y .'7'� a �'`�t'.i ^*l, J,✓ ¢vy 4` w y-r y. $ fi � 1 - s .z�,,.y `7' w:: s. .%'S• 't' e' ri, y.. !ti oe� Y a•� r, a r. —J. r -F � kaG � r ' • � M `� .tom t t�.� o - � ' i' � � � ` �f �+, � F` � i �' j Cyr 3 11 ''F, f x rx d ^} •✓ c t. °a c 1' • �i}v# yj �' '.� t� "`k _ ., a -, , 53t s '"` � � �.:t ♦ >�'i.0 -c. h • '� � 4;, t..x t♦= :€ s. to e �a •, 't'r� moi:' '� C'- � Y � t✓'�' L ta.' 7 S -' � �ri1 • :5 3 i "t' Y S � : � ♦ T �° t `i.: -Pr�,i� a- ro4-a � � c � .t• .'r1 '�:`.� rr a' tr ,. �' e* � ,• v#y -r f: • ` a� �' rs..* ? ,� c Ty .i c +w - • 4. yn � _i,'�F .x 4.,_ X ., z 1 � �+, � r Fri71 s +'•s s c µ '•r yt.::u "yi 4z l sr , f *,.. : 1 �c a P �..rr y "W' ♦ a.. i .tl '�.� ; �'"+r.� ' � • it - t 4✓ x-�i -:✓a � � a � 'bF �'. • A .O,r �A `�;'. 4t 4 �.�:; c,tt '• 'a' t a 2. tt 'i F~^+ � �1 F.s � t� t C �- 4 ; �"..r A ;... �i ncr�,°,ra .. h'� � .. i'' k.. � •�' �s 7 �`" � -, y,.. a ��. - Y � :,z a i '+ � - ` '- � +rl ""` ''e 4 •t '�1t.I 1 y r� .,�;� a sy.. "`" �u .j i s' s s+� - T -.a T a - r 4 .' t '' 'sl t r C `r "4 3 s �+ v o �. . x s� a("r.�' j i "• i ± t v- #` R ;.:x u S s i. .t t .:;..,tg ter.,..♦ CA. o T may, t� „� � Y �� a � ; a ^' � , # .�....�. ''" ,= f t �'� a c t Y , t •.: fit• •-k' 7y t T'` vH—i t w +' t - �, �.-i ~S.1'' a wt *�� •u' =•3'•a r �'+ � � ,r �A a.,- f a s g a.. t-�- t S ,. � 1r.-4 • y -[ <. +}r r-t � � ... '' ' t'. ,.I ,a g_. -t• ° s `• •^ r- - Y r y s 'Xq y . V y aiW-41 t - r 5 ` u. ,: s. !, F t Y r# a'v.' -• y C Vrt a F ti } %', Jthk .r y n .ria' e r • C ::t' i Ii:`^3. I>;. ',I'"..Cl nEs• r { �, t _ e s •:., f R ♦t .c. Y.. "y �_ • l - ry w •``Jq �. ty ,«� y'W �� `,:. � �� 1 � 4 �'� i � ,t i,A t 7 V • �r� { t .� i -�,} .1 i +Txi+ s ` rr � G aY.:- ,a ; 'c < � � �. '6 fff--- � •ate a+�J-�j �-3.1 { � a I '. s � . �♦ � w �' ,, 'N i � i., { fi�-r* s {K t t M� 'si _I�i. c�L 1 i _ 4• .s..r a/ Y~ i� �"7i 1 . Y/ s rr r,4 k cts r_�• " ' t t jam^ l2't -:L•�,_Q� � i:,2 � 't% �:...+ r: a! -`-�` -, .L '� � . a _z—:1z�-. ,_ i� 1 l 1r 4 Z~ 1 . ).;.., i J r 1 '{' + 6 I. i l n r a a • , %s tl \, r �' a. ' � + � - � y a..�`., tk. �T ir- `. . t-T(,_ a.�r :. e � r`� r s.ti +• �_' T`e.- v s �.' .�. `� � :. Lt:.� .,."lnc .` • �7.i z a + a. gr ! Ytf - i tL ' •H 11 l,,� -C n :er •�' !'s .� rt - Xis tea' `si Y-•'FY S '• 1:~ • 1 1 i 1 ? ,{, • r� L a Z n F t �,. � a n ✓,'a i Ys . � 1 s �\ � FZ i � ��/> r f r �. ti �` sc J' .r• 3 _ s. '^ 4 5 n r.•. 2 '. 8 7 •, 1 4 .5' { ,, 4' +" t e aysc i •f`�-�.� `_- a f - 1 i � �. .1 r f � :g � .`Hl _ �t t -tea Y • s <�/ti. �...ra.--"� .:_. .+- f�^� � ''"�--wrs....e.T f_ `� � .i `r (jCC �'rK � m � 'w `�-� �[ 1 � � � a a. fir... +.� ?1" � ' ��-.' - +•>'��c� a � �� •�-1 � • ... p�A.l{.ir, t � � "'' �.+.i...� , .9-' x i a F ' 9i,yy Zr r� � $% �: i {� o F'9 i _ t � � ' i -.". � �'� -t- ^ri.+,�` r�. j s_'._'.r. � t ✓'r )' - n. 'p•s= � F � �\ t ..v1 ♦.� die-r'.� ~..�+.e '.'^`-!• ,[-. 'tis-��-��'6�{, � r "r e r ti.f. � x, x r �r- J3 .. �� `� f,�. - .. jc •�` t J '�` �,pi�,r. •bM. �,.t..r�-...�, '1' .e a .L - �• d J - !ry �` 4 . �,.{r. ••a„ ! �� f i..o,, w- yy+ � es `�.,'=l � � 1 � "4. .! : ..t 1 j a ` �d �"� r' r+ �, �e .� _ �f!'" „` `'. .d f r l ! `-� �, I •.ry •r- 1 �+ . „ if a 1 / t --8. q..t �/ /•r r(� a- � �.f� a p c��rl 77 'rL' !+` � `✓� _-� ;� r-� t Y. �" -a � f +.7 \ .. ..a ._ .,>... � " •� ;5 ' r r , c rr r mw .[�; >� ��. s ,•r'/ � -. %s4 7 ,t+ � , � i } r:Y a F4' � l - �l�jvF�� xr�' � '�,r �"`e'^"' r'�f -s i -• .f. `J/�_,,,.r* �/ r ,,,..-.. _v�� _,t. (� a 3 e � �., - -Y . <a a -•_, L' _.+ j ••j '� r -"� }•� ✓ / \ j� �.�' Y$_�w• ��.. � _ �,9'g1 i.. is �� Y e��. -rh `1.•.ni i� r . .�-i .r M S � a� �� Fy r/`6 � � { •+"•�- -� � is �^•w.. a �`.,�� :,.` -,� 1�. }41`_ a9` 3 . aha' 1..>' �� •,1 -+. E. ( 1 � ,�,.. Oa-'a• a ,Fi-r `rte } � �` - :9( 'S "` _moi 1 It— ,Rsa ` r ,r �!; � o+r ..a a.. ` �? 'j; ♦ �: mal �^.♦. `f^v r, r' _-i _pJ_�T.-�., " i:..�r.,• ; aim R, �..i j k, ,-} s` .' -X I "� ,'•� o ►C r L ((tLe .t.r A ----�• ',S''' :�'r F tE. r s r i r. ��Y �r F � •.- /{ _ FF ps • � '� � � _ r�r.-- f� "'" r ^it ti� s .. - w� z, RE � ♦ ti�i/ � � L �3 ] Nr- Jyj''• } `fin" i 16 4 51 t a � • �4� �4 u z � J:r•Y'�J RET� � a Vii► +� s�• � b-� � - ; '• /r � • 4 1i C � ~ '- i..,ta..� 4a LV;z •3.a yyr r nx€ u. r .s. ,. �� f .+•�� 't ,. i- �� rs�.r r Lam►,;. a Y } L f gad 4p .+K AZ - 137 ! i' i a t .,,e t r'4 Fes, .,t f' x r;�•. * "WA �•,�:_ r '� < x 'S. e�' s s, �yfi-j � `rr 1i' i 'e o :n k �,- j4 t 9x' ,. �,,:.,iv, t . i � `f' �• t ." s- ta. :' t L .T» �,.( •:. t +Gp � t � d t .� i -F'r F a.^ .^ .a r i�' fz F:. 3 T�,kr I t :i 'r i.z t , � f �s _) +`� r '�_ �. ?. v s-r� � ra' y,} � �, .�; k. ✓. -r � x ti '.. w ',i �,yr ;_r c' fi s c r r E rr x ,t cit r r r •r Cs _ I s� s j � x, t -= a ' t �.4 fit E ,3 �;t � � S! 2- , -t_ 3s Lf -y, • f r ` x:. f '� � e rt7 i a i ti Sy r f- i h x t >s r% i� z , ,,� t ,� s IA sjr� e` •`.l._ s t.• ;1 r { ` { A �� , r � k r sx $ -`r. ; 1� s f ,�.: �- �y L � _ � - - � %� [ .•s, j 4 a ti _ } a. ! Y" '• d r ,+.s. ,fl N f ^,n b f 'vt us ,S a '* ''. ; = t t x � �w.z{ `' t - r' , � .,, "� t ! j t` rawf tri }�"� r `.rr },t f : ti 4 s wtRr r'ci r�. • f s`" a # a j-xS �' ti r i •�"� ; l j4�� ''Sr :� s t. r V. i C Y ' i h 2. s� • i t$ 1 a a wJo ,• +r. ?-.. / �__' _� a f •r' x �a k t "_v A- s n }`c, + - > A �4 l 1— s � rt n< 'bd ;_{t "�� ;�, � er r ._t ♦.s _" 4 :� •. i ��R t �lfu r� } �-; � tS r.71 "A' r- in r +' " t s. k s 'hY A i .g x z rx f ±y? ^ * _ e$.. _ (•< g tti. dr t r +>„ s u: ...._ f w-,7 r - t ;✓ ' rift '7 Vie-", f a Y.} R,/ W .Y• r a - r .� f - •1 '. f._ �l s '^ s "^ :. i r ��' x � q._ � K i "� -+`.. } r- -`- r Si �i�•,TMy 3- tv �z v � 'yv a ••9: �` e,e. �. k ,.� ,-r -d L ,'rrrkr } r"?` Jr h { r rt i ..,+ i ! y r i.` { l 21 rt :dab e4�+I i f~k `�:;1:-* 4 r�'�'n> '�+{,..3 . s:.. Fp` u+.t i „� t' t ` h-5 .+c i "'+.k z-'`d'.�vs:, q `• �^ ''� U1,'�.„wtt' t 'S.•, :� y {�_ w .� 4 rr r .. .s:. " aj f � i ��' � -� tea t ,a fi'�� i +` �=✓ r � 9 �,..ys �. -ter � c'tRR,� i t � f�`. J �� ,y � u ". ti- -- .5�.+ �' S .4dr+ � r xr Y i" T .iA .y fi .A yy i� *std,•^,', ♦ w 3 «* f _'' .`�! , `t AW x V �"! na Al j ;y '3. _ ♦ S ,{f J Y K tJ y � � f -r = � .5 +* � .�• �. � N � � �-'�s'9' vt a +r + i t K+� st1•�1 3 .y 't ,i •. ,+ .'C L s- i/ -•tR i :� r f"j.-r'3 „i3. `c:i �" -� A•M v.t f �t A 1 } : i'`t ,', e "r t 1t g"a� �� .�. ?� r� ... •. x „ da:: r ._tom 4n - a �,� �,,,.'ti ' i T ': c� e?'�t F "'x 4. k nr R n n F r 1. �• �� s �. Ry rY • t . r r 3 pta : 1 - !: �' �: r � di "4 r i ` i �._•df#. A!� K. s*y5.� } .rf jj �-;T � .�l�S _:.;� 4f Y"y .'='Z � .rt yar *. � f rl rr..e i Y` � .r ey�'y�� ,,,,.�Ft,�;�.,,7 v1 � _. t z. •r..t�° F�` �� - r."� ?t �� ; ..6,°--�• .".-•rte �R :'+� z . v' - s4 't.... s - r ■' ■ -W71 6+� Ilk,� ,jts f.zo I� ?;.nth ��.t °_ ag `i : �a`k ►IASSt�y:�. ��iS r,��,.v -+i• y � o r �t'n° '}* s t.. �,.?{'r �a ,�i4 (.+.-: :w i.' 5; t :\ 7 r.Y t a t �_' i1+ xg.• 8 t� r V� - .:� ��t'� y.+�i�� tne�. �a'•...bb r,":` .s .i�r I �r �'' ^ � :b h i s ;,� 26r. t Wo q NotON l P 4 fp .Rp �.s1 Sb INKK - f ; ynto R lot- Sf_ 1 t !z.i PC OIL oo -us tf i0 OW i1 2 TAY •i '1�1� J� .r ,t � 4 � � n i -ft -Y4f s•J - yWoo Y t i % N .. i . s.t SAW Onot my 7 sr s r t -, -xfx r eon �. met i v w Aa lie jr 4 P - � -: t �i^ t�"J ,� q_` � _„•.mac :� !P+ r ar"r : / Y � A 1 f r� - ve • S�If � ,.. • � t r ` Vt QA' ' r te n-!};= t ►`. a �� ` r a i,. r ' c•^'`•$�s,r� t' / ♦_ / �. � �. is sv. •+`J 't. •'a ,i+ � c � � f . -7 r .1.-�, y� t -_ �s �.....-1 'Ay Srw •�_ ra, kr � 1 � :� i � �~'r s /_ y '! -. ..'s • � � % '-f�' .r /. (f.+. i a .� �. i .f � Z�1 r ,3 `, t F r t r •s�/ -t1 r F<S > -., .✓._r 1. d- a?� :`' �. r j r 4 _ �•r t+r'.. ,� _t �'�fir S'-• :.. -�, �' r. o -n sem_ i a� '" 3-- y +�' �. :'Cs..- .ci .r,• ! t �`or' r- ,�, - r 71. ~ ! .t ` ,i�.rl 'r K \�.e i ? f i <� .:r •.ed "s• �y .1.>aa •--•/ t. t i M1* p E ..r"1"f-ea -•�/�: Y �..F.f rQ ti. •C =s-Sr„� tea~ t r ..7'._� ,. ♦ >`�, :`.`- f ': i `� _ i'�., t .�' 1 4 fir- � E S� '� � • •. 1, �- r }::. t ' c �a ,/'' �• � ' t � .t � t - � ��.tr c � ,f d+. `, � d 7 ` S t �. .:ssY ../ �{�. 5 •.r”=�-� � a 'ti.r s'z � y� ?.'��v� G �.iu >, °.:{ 11+ r i Z-,..`" r r J ^ 1 1 c -- - 'i G,[ •' ,tea. a - s+.-. .may k. �r < j` -�E-- R* e '`�'ti r _ ra . � ' { 'G ,il, ,:o '1S n. ;S •_ 1�.. f ,E. yI i 1.`. , �1. ff��, -€� �s 4i ,*✓v%i) �{{ •l �.t. �.j-�19' �� i7� /Mfi J��.L 2rte. �-{ - -� r� f ! Z •,�� PY: ate,. 21: ...`J!� ��t tf -.�-' ii a'. c / - z' 7 : f - 4�-. � f - ra L.yG, /.fs��'... \ � ' )`' �: "S_�.�` _-�.,r,''1'� •-�`• � r r f F+ r, .z .r �} a j - / � � FF'v, � � '.i:�i f �.' �%.h �,+. r a s�'�. h ��„i �F ` 1. .� r.` p �4; h� L f. - `�r�_,,,j . �r'•= j � jj � � •` 4 �� i � [�. Y i �.. � >, + : �a a' a: i... Y � r .4 4 i � a �1 . J 2� t�r4'"� ,�--..rte-' J2` •circ - •t �, d ., Y ��1 "� g . u°�•; `o- _1 �. � -�,; r.[� �� Lf.f � -t• • 1 `!1n 'na~ t�`1 �.��Ya.- -t S"1 -- L �e.y� •.l , j��r•�-? � •`� `•i { .. ct }r y , E. i @ ! �^ � y{ •1 �' r 4: - 'P in±r �'l:.Y.� �.1��. Ra��-, a -�i x r - [ .,t ♦ ..� ! 1''-1..•f,Js ,' _ �r a''. •., S � t ' � �. �-,a <t e Z_ r:"_ -�"'a ►••�+"�.i �'c�'�-j �!t^ts .�: J a t t v r z_r f ,i, � �3�. � �` ^ r t,,. aY. * r B ,;•_, /� �rl 4'ti' .1r.� i E i ii � � '.� t �: ♦� i � 'S. jn S „!' 1 _ .��,a _ -rr r1'z. z-' ;-�f y _ ? Vii- ((@ a ..�r'3ri rr p "•A.'_' - _ .,i -. �" a-:.1 �r' r < r �. A. S c,. .-.� f'" F �" � A ; r . • i r2 u 1 ti _.� _ f y l _ � o�� _' i >� � r y .�{,l �j�31�.` ,.,' it `T- / s�''� v stir z, �� .i� � L��t l .y �� rt. +:�.. c r 's -'� ` Y Ls b\ r �+ � r{.-." ��l_. ...t.�, �''�-- �-- S6 r y � t �o- a ',/� ¢' '\• t . /t �..�f �' t �P� ! �i..0 � ✓ •_ SK_...� i n �-` y •� r - a, -r 4 r t.� �� ,��•'�>t C'. t.. , r 1111111`````` : Y �' �".1, i t •�. - "`r _ ' : '�'•- �• ti +,, �T .- � l � r' fe ,.•r ��f p.• e�-•' �•.�t� �- � a'` - `�_�r-r!. _ a.-tlri 1• r1� .. �f-s. -\` ti J .�'o'o.t, .`a w -.. ,e r �.I ,_� _.� s.•s` ti °yt'•f t � � �� .. _yat �., z%tr� ilt, l j , �.� i d'�. { 1 4-r,�.�_ ...Q ,,,. h,F.-• � a�' ti, t -..-. J � < i - p� r3l a,t.�"�_a. ��- - ^^�.�'/!� •. ,i tx �t.-:. .lt;'�� Jy � I z > r t a I t rL -. ♦ '. t 4� �,z t f� ►•. � X:1, , •L M L l 4 4 ?' S) t• Al k �L � C : ,• r n r i t lyr•�� ..,�, y.rt„ �-.. v^�� t a .Pik t€t' �,.ii .. �x s , * r � 1 ✓F i'2� ci r '' C l eve ! r5 ''' '�.�, ."�'i i r:;+'c - � {• ,I S "e � r; z _k -,r r :� Ix{,t j 1 itrf� S'+" l c�}. r".(Z Yz y'x.'� d_'�T.✓�,i 1ft�*� �;:�ici }%tiY �j. Ad -Nor r t 1 ` 'fF ►� he 'r� �f 'r. l.tX."r rl:tt �Tt�.:.lSC •"LLe b�.s°..j ' ,l1 > r ri r f:. , .1 '.+ 7s+' �+ ..,y z. 3 ... -}L rt;;• J� �zrR > tj j4 h1 't • ttr a iii r, t. tt"` i.-A� i >`j £t_ �'• i T" r .•i i Jz � i i F t r �. � oil t.G I � °•ti.� �-f'1"j� T t f^ T7`"_�+:- tlf ..• � NOVA � � 3L � ,e ZOO 91 i j T r i will Lyn NO —Liz too AWK An Ila r L a } ,. • •.. � -' Lam^►-rz"+�. a Yy ` ` _ �_ Y L V fstoop 1001�-- F 4 y T„( k -41 m y r s a - - � . _ .�,� • r . :�'Q,. - ¢,+::�� a .<r-� . S �` 9 tp _ • `� � r� � - � � f •'.;i .r _ - r "lea - .,. _ c -:: f� r -_ ' + 1 tA r' , 4'L 1, l' Y,''°f 79t` 11 f; •.. t s t: �1 1 y �,t. � 1 J�. �! 4`�.. r 1 W J ', JI , pf ++I r�J Ju.r, n{1. t ''a 'S`.•� t j + a � �, �'(,tf ` jf r ..� ` >�fl'•la�' "D�1 ! , I e >;.,'" '.• i f yX .., `111 ti n s r�,r �t3ir SF Ail,lix �" ,+ \ :a } , Ir s i •. 41 / J,4Y1./r) II. `.� w�,ljf ,;r'd rt /�1. T 1 T sYt �.S,J �, 3rKJwrAki�, Y rf{� h y ,, ' tl } � ' 1 1:• i'`.t "ara ..1 � � i. •�� 'dl;i r'...` \ f'i 1 f j- � ' I �: i ,fir nl ' a. +t.9 K,`1, ri •")(•ter �l g•J 'l, � � 1 t1+�r 1� 1� ,. .S yl tit.' � n! ✓rwl, • Oi�t�� I � / � f y t 1 , ` , 4 o i ti � 5 `a: I a- � , r , �,!l �� ,. '' I Ytr. •t + S. J\ : 3 - a ' d 1 1 ab.�, 7� .x ,Y� til t � t ✓ p. } _ G -•�* � ! \ 3 r LJ+ 5 � R 'A7 L j3 y^ +. • f 1� r 1 i''. 1 � 1'f �� e � f � \. .... - • �� rpt � `w.y, - 1.. , , r, ,• t .,may tJ �1 .} J 1 1� � I � ti � • a � u 11 ♦r1',+ k �•`M SK ..ti �1 `i y a 5�u�� 4y '1� ;' S - ,. rt ..'�1. I .ate" 1 �4M j^ �y 1.. ,• S,'• i r a l � �� y} (• r x � f I t � f a y Iir' �• , r 4 J �� r 5; = 1 L + �.` �" V �� al 1 .. ,.. ,� +, y ,5 J4 .� .F'`,d; 1 y . : p•,s � :.. .r 1 1 .r '} r J. c * r;. ii � it y 5� � l ,r \ , � ,q • y ! r,. ; 1 Y�s13 �FS`r r " v y�L: k ." �:. Jr a I.yfit , L iJ y/ ( L •iY t\ � • '{`Y"'+ J A�� i .5 SI '"'•S'�3 •1 ^I {, � JJ5 r ...+1 `t l � tiL l { lr` 4 �'xr � t .:..�y� A `• '�, 1 \ i_' ty '` � T' i F •� . A �-I + ,1 u' 11.. f'�. s. 1..1 4y1-�, -I. ( ,�,a-.. ru , •,:a t r.. ' � 7. +:,�,t .' 7 R Z -. t ! r .•+ ! at c s t i a � r,�` Y ti f.y t y �. a .a' _ a' \.. \ \ 4.; `" �: � � i•f L: + tt _.,w ♦ � � e ti .3 t ;� � l ��.. F i 4'` '4, '.. ` ' ! _7 4r �.Ir a k • a � � 3 �� . i � F ar ....c � �* '/' � _ r -.F `} v ! � _ r .� ; ! —sr. a i � Y� __ � _, ! . •• - • � .. i` yv '' t � pS�+r' ah x. 1 o I , t � � �; f C". f f t ,' t t "� r t r \ 'r 1 r =]0. L � ,. l .t i ''r s f .� '1C t z'' r w ,�, p � �. { w c ..s..Ft -! ,# � .,•- � � I S J ':i � ... l4 �_ l,+7. • Y .y "SYy14t.I l JJ i T j � I1"i Y.. I �l��rt P �i $ YY 2 U . ! 'Tr Yti •- V Y^ t �'x ! a 11- � s• f I ^rC -.+ s {s �: fit.,. •>..� -`r '+r�--r t 7 ;r a � -F ! f F c i ` •': `_ � °<4 f ♦ "� } , � �y y �-'•' rte-:; � ' � +fit � •Oil•x1 r �{� ;\ 'J - f e - � f t 5 _ 'x✓• 1 - v ^- 1 . r •' T '{s• f J ! L � �F � 1 o d 1. 1 j`= '� -' f �C.� =•r 'ii: `` • `• v -Y .1. 1 tZ` i7.�n r` 5 � a r� . � " ` c� �� ` �' - ~ Zi ` l :9 � �l y2: } cT•` a ..�3.. fJ�t`ir>7 1.� 1• • Ste' .'� a---� V -i-+., � }J' dh t• I F � t -. (� i 'aE we �.j�l� �� c � t f` e �l-. ^... ��: �a'tT'. 14 WIZA - r1, _ a t fz ?r' �,A it Y�--+'°'" +l -4�:R♦ i=�„dN Y X � � ..t �� frie '�. 4,J 'Js'u'•: K �:a r rem .. 'Fx• .. t' '.Ti J - .fir ��t r a�.�s•• C ]�. . ! .. .. �.•� ► � } :sf F - i ar ' °4r �; �-�`wr-'°"9 't t -\l + _ ►- ~ ~ 4 c3 7 r t i t tom. G to .w° ,ef "* \ v r �` - , ♦" Y Yp� ~ 1 B ` t a � �,.- r '`y F' ps7�_ t7 ;� 't � s d rf a ;6 �FW"=f �' � ► �gf'a ! � YP' +`•- Wj _� S'yQ,+�irl �4 '� .•+ y Sc Ca-^ � �,, •. � •,�, ! r '. �N � # �' eiA!'r,An••� ! .' 'amu � ,.�h ^` ti � c - ta' t r:• ., e f � - ^a ,,,, < + { z r � Y 4 � t rT "• ?? M ;. f � 'y-G e r ° 7 S � � S s i t 4 �: s �. ♦ xr' a <.as K S; �� t � s^ t :� f"' C r i*-, r..� rf -F.: �. t '. "' � e !< � '„e �•.c ,.Ery ti t c � }5 !, y f ,a � '^r ,(' i J "'_ i +- ' p t 3`f. Y r > f 1 - s �"..�w-• :.! : � / ,; � i� ` ��ti �..- :r fn �xx .,s ,. ,,,� ...SY" 2 _: `g• r t �.• � tF« _- ; # a t ,x.: t 1 F ' r ,F '>c F x N ♦r� R If r V. z:�., P <H.-_= i rya �,��.1 1 r:;, i . �` •� 3 �., -.'r' �M,., -' w. ,!, l e � E E� � � E L ,< `�Y„��. `•. 'S �� ,.,r � 7 .'.ps ! 3 i .r j � r�� s �~ � q' t <�s;j-`�t 1 f ;.e ,rf ' y r �'7` r 4 ` T� r f E. r t •< - + j : �. •_ N '.F 4 `'C' k ',T i., . yli.3w .`!'.' # .S} i y"S < f 1 " - �' Y C p Y 't .» s f ,� ,� ` .i f.. f •-•-_'�y ` '- _� '��7 ,. ¢ SC-.. ,�5. i ar �` 2 � -�, g �� i.'« rf .•'�S s * µ s r 11 _c fr. _°at/ i m� 3-. rF?� sr:+r• � s rr";a ,:fa / � � � :: � f= o , r ,�. � �,_4 � • r � r ,� { Mit - ,• � peva < r � S f � Y 341 3. p �7..J'�? Tk s f h b Wl . `�'KS tom`^_- y" >�� ,l � +r { �r•§'+`i. �FT..i^,>'t � !+'-'#'�`Y s.� a f*r+ �5� i ,F. ..� 1 c '> '._4 ti Svr i� � ` '� s?.�...i.Cv .,�. • 5�..ne"S"�:.. � , cr='�'' � .J '�A � � i r•v.� � '^ Y.tai �J%# t .�"* ..n;c .anti `�z't`:�S �k` Fly `, t �� ,� .aq. �.'- %sv !r�" y �� y s � 1 � ,�' � ��... sT :.R' ,_ �`_ (i ! �-..• . s 1 #Sr^ sti r ri. __ a r,^.` ',,T" "yv f i t xis.?'''4: r _.±r�� r +,G ; a „�+,, r�... N r<' r� ,1 /".�'S... i i { , y_ • r t, ♦,r,,-s' »t n �+c' a r ? < r r 1 y.. a _ ya �.s. - J "�""'^ � •.ti '$xs s 1 Via' f.., � . +� T'�''xra" �+tr ;sxr � „� � s y�d� 'u ids �c+ii �(�t,,,r ' r� »,� --�_ y : C t T �'' r � > ss `.✓ Y r y� LF�a.. _ �+ i .,;r< �T �, s �,7' R3 „t � "t sr�� f :ire ,,, } ?,:� �.�_• T y T �'°"Sns. �: w Sr G' - 4sn i'.. ¢•'� � ,3.)r ,r t �, sw ii .Mr''�� P q ca,• fill f +t r i � S .. -c .x -•� � �{ A s <"o..'F+j Y�?'"'ti 4'S �'..i �'��,... i r, 24^ 1 �� . � r. sJ�r.. r a_�` r. N � � �� .. t. ' j' "� t t-: '• � .s''"r"y J'!— j,� : - #3^_ � -\rx� xTr.�`'� to ' t, "`r.' � � x - f LS'`r � ' i; Y .,r '� i -1 x •� � 4 Y� •��, 7 X � 'i, a �,� * s - s �.a..., t, c a � � .�. r .� rr ? � a. x - i� `�� • s --� a, �'-i-: + x! n_&. { S - "4.,� t,-s !' ! £ E "s �.-' ; � ?{1" s ,y +„ r � j .f r � F S..rk! :" S ✓. 22s..y lt�.€, _'3 E '4`: � ��l * � :' � ,� e F. ! . r x 1 � i � �� .,�s, } in :? ,r'`'"• ; _y ��k; ��,3` f �}x y t ,_� � �� 1 Fes•;"�i��•'rf -^ �y� � s•�# q i � � �� -Sr � } rs !• ¢ Q. '~ na i va. 3 4 K '�i`Z 51 'Y.''9.. . ,S� { c'} .r � � � - '� xy ,'d,{' T :`y""r� r �-'rea' a � ur :. � j � u, -t '-!,• ''•n- : t � . t ; 3 P + :< '{ w.r r.'x a,a5 xrY; } yr,z E♦ % s. f iy;,,-yJ y, as E n Sx c t .'ra. '� .,�f T _ fX\�. `tet � �t'S.. �•{�`rra.��y �.�: _ r ; '" � �+l t:� 1 � } sf � rl� - `s:;,,r,�a 1 «J,i�4.yf2+ „�'�'%y��i+.;V:�'�f � ~i 'Y "%;:S?" ��3's �"y"h'r�',+.yr:` �..i '.?'qs"'��! k$,�•i.�i.�'�. �."� 't �;� ,�' •4 , ". � _r �:. �x/ •: �'; a.� ,� � s �v"rt+5�.,$. :' Tci ��.�F xR•-•2,y -:v ^4 -•sc � '�'.�i�` #+<' ."� n�b�v-+�: h"v„,ry3T.5 .,., 'a*-' A.r't � x wa�� T� �:: � r'a �,. .:. �s..... '�:�c`fi '�x i ::.-.� .!. �Eiat+ry,� 'ss-x:�aC. ,i"- r'i=F.'�,c> ';t"-.i ¢,'��.'= '$ Y't �"�7c��""^��h«-,,,,•� _.;rr •.� � -r f o .� � � r �s`• f:* �. _ y;�°� „s&' 7� r �+,' r'tit: _�4Y{' �{, .lr:,,. .s r � �'Y� e a�.✓y,�`" �"" E _ ,uzT' {-.:._- 3 �- 3 •,r a � ., "cam ,'c j ' :�, t. +,- g r �, �>^T'S _��• ��sr r=.../ R L s}i s`-� r rt-+.,� t �,-.,� '6' 1i -s �� T-'M e..•s t.x'x ,a'�i'-`.�V �,,1� � - ,i • - �"* �� "Y f i� ay a � � .a< ai rB� fir.. s^ �#�� ,..+� Li ; t.,.4 i r�r ,!'� �h � . �` y°`' �: S:. S e �y .. f,�a :. �, t _ m �' 'sx 4 'iF� ;. tl bloom�Also 7.f 1 - t 3:•il > �'- 8 ; ;ZG s .,a'V. ,rr s♦ A+ t �/ :.�j I ! t to rw < '7:. '''h'' 5` .tiV ..t' -i �, ;w �r�� 1� d t 'E;o < .ry a} _-.1 +'�'. p7Te Y i aY �1 v i 4 P t ' i iF" F• ! "•'� Ta f� _ -'a.'� v t i.» .f�- tS ,7 i •I - f I,..r I s' r i, *x -! t�� A IT0 G f S S' Y was 0 t xi { , . itrt`` ":• t,! ;-r * t r.. �-• r 4 + _y J/ , s ,�:� t t .,�., 6 r q'Itp�r{ e.'�1 ♦ VY ' �I' ,• f�X P--�Q"' -•s 'c,, � �` x ? r a f � # � S •3 s ` 4 •, 4� -lop Ono 4 wow . !4 J r � � � a d ! kl^� � � � 4 q„ A �• � y •� J R d ; � L � a7 F - 'tCr Me low A, YX } Y ice= :� r , f ta •a is �rh ° a rtX� v- Cr'xa I �'.v. y `sz T � -• 7 � '� ,� a c� X � ak;� � � i 4 ?I.�l�} � t . '•sy, t� `'` a .� • z �+ y x `'' ry r ty we MEN won F at C „fie,GANT VA Mon Rx A. e• .cu' f� 1- "{ y f ir 4-4 Mn A 5 SAW yf_ 'x L Cx v ,s' -��-• # .p s ! :s �,. `a r 3 xf :. r ys. ; sOR uq� •} - �, i S C IQ 'tJy ' y ), a f j,/ .? r �, S 1 j f _ti r � �,- � .F r� •. " y _ � .l L s'�,y T I •! i kty �_ � 4 �;'\ } �� fix' 1. ~ 5.{ - SITE 6325 1 � awnuae n.0 I.®w.LL ♦ r4TAe D.iun - ❑ SpTvrn (PrJ�q�Ci eO+l ___ wavv ewro.n Figure G20. Plan View of Site 6325 F Fey M E is Fez E 2 Fey 1 Mvaa� Fea. 8 Fey A }��MIa10.:1 3�n '=Fey D v r Fr C _ = p Fs Q-1 Fez Q-2 , Fez Q – SITE 6312 Fa A 1 I I � 1 0 i C-33 — EASTFACE 0 e bo + 1 l n 20- 30- 40. 3 4 11111.11 1� SOJ 0 10 20 10 10 so 60 10 BO 90 100 CENTIMET2" La� 0.28 ,lbs, r.Vnj hem 12-29 m dlidc wry dwk gayah brown (IOYR 32 moist): cob* silt kam dark brawn (I OYR 32 dry): weak. very fin~ trarlublr so mm sdc very hvble: non-sodry, non'Piesoe mrestarKM coffw a% fine roots: noncultural srer. Figure C-21. Site 6325, Feature K TU -1320-33, East Face Profile qw C-34 Site 6337, Feature B C& ROCKS FACED Figure Cr22. Site 6337. Feature 8 I i 1 1 1 1 f i 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 Site 6337, Feature C Figure C-23. Site 6337, Feature C -C) ROCKS FACED C-35 0 a G36 Site 6337, Feature D Oft 5 10 o2 ROCKS e. 1 PLANTING AREA Lr t SLOPE DIRECTION C�7n ROUGHLY FACED 9rrr BEDROCK �,'� CRACKED BEDROCK Figure GI4. Site 6337, Feature D 0 0 Site 15108 FLAT SOIL AREA Figure C-25. Site 15108 G37 I DEAD TREE Oh S 10 Om I 2 3 BEDROCK PLANTING AREA tyv SLOPE DIRECTION fS' 1 SINGLE FACED AREA W PILED COBBLES r ]D Figure G26. Site 16119, Feature A NLP �v',•'I�,��I] �� t��fffYS}x_��iii�___»''�`__��x�, lY :r �If'I►��f. al��S�ff_.} s�. CLEAR RAT �W GRASSYAREA +:fir►�� f TRUNK �f CLEAR FLAT•�►��+GRASSYAREA ' ,�.. ,�•'�•� J'glih �r ON . ail. •�1� ak 4z/ GRASS AND LANTANA '�1i�r��►r::'iJ`�i� �. e FEATURE DATUM PILED .:: __..-40- ALIGNED:. . PAVING Figure G26. Site 16119, Feature A ' APPENDIX B ' Lehua Lani, A Planned Unit Development Kailua-Kona, Hawaii ! Traffic Impact Analysis ! Witcher Engineering LLP ' August 2003 ! i 1 1 1 - ! LEHUA LANI, A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KAILUA-KONA, HAWAII TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AUGUST, 2003 PREPARED FOR: LEHUA LANI LLC PREPARED BY: WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP 75-5751 KUAKINI HIGHWAY, SUITE 106 KAILUA-KONA, 111 96740 (808)334-0322 (808)334-0831 Fax W • TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY..........................................I A. Purpose and Study Objectives ....................................... 1 B. Executive Summary ..............................................1 H. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT..............................................1 A. Site Location...................................................1 III. STUDY AREA CONDITIONS..............................................2 A. Study Area.....................................................2 B. Site Accessibility ................................................ 2 C. Land Use......................................................2 IV. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS ...................................... 2 A. Physical Characteristics ........................................... 2 B. Traffic Volumes.................................................2 Table 1 Peak Hours of Traffic Flow .................................. 3 Table 2 Traffic Counts for Peak Hours ................................ 3 C. Level of Service.................................................4 Table 3 Levels of Services, Existing Conditions, Peak Hours ............... 4 V. PROJECTED TRAFFIC..................................................4 A. Methodology...................................................4 B. Trip Generation.................................................5 Table 4 Trip Generation ........................................... 5 C. Traffic Distribution ......................... ..................... 5 Table 5 Traffic Distribution ........................................ 6 Table 6 Turning Movements for Lunapule Road ......................... 6 D. Trip Assignments................................................6 Table 7 Trip Distribution and Assignment .............................. 7 VI. TRAFFIC AND IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS ......... . ......................... 8 Table 8 Levels of Service Comparison ................................ 8 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS .................................... 9 ' i • ' TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) ' APPENDIX A Location Map and Tax Map Key Map APPENDIX B Level of Service Criteria ' APPENDIX C Level of Service— Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street (Computer Printout) • Existing Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic APPENDIX D Level of Service— Alii Drive and Lunapule Road (Computer Printout) ' Existing Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic • Future Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic tAPPENDIX E Level of Service— Development Entrance (Computer Printout) • Existing Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions AM and PM Peak Traffic APPENDIX F Traffic Movement Diagrams— Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street ' Existing Conditions AM Peak Traffic Existing Conditions PM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions AM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions PM Peak Traffic Lunapule Road APPENDDt G Traffic Movement Diagrams— Alii Drive and ' Existing Conditions AM Peak Traffic Existing Conditions PM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions AM Peak Traffic • Future Conditions PM Peak Traffic ' APPENDIX H Traffic Movement Diagrams— At the Development Entrance • Future Conditions AM Peak Traffic ' Future Conditions PM Peak Traffic U I - -- I r • I TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS r LEHUA LANI9 A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT KAILUA-KONA, HAWAII , I. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY A. Purpose and Study Objectives The purpose of this report is to provide data showing how the Lehua Lani ■ development of a 10+ acre, 59 -unit, single-family project on the mauka side of Alii Drive south of Lunapule Street will affect traffic along Alii Drive at the development. ' In addition, the impact upon the intersection of Lunapule Street and Alii Drive and at the intersection of Royal Poinciana Street and Alii Drive will be analyzed. Also, since Lunapuli Street and Alii Drive have been seriously impacted in the last several years by developments such as Alii Lani, Kona Hawaiian Village and Sea Ridge, a comparison will be made with traffic of three years ago at these two intersections. ■ B. Executive. Summary The construction of this development will have little affect on the traffic on Alii Drive at the development. Providing a left turn lane into the development will not appreciably improve the flow of traffic on Alii Drive. Therefore, no recommendation concerning a left turn lane is made. The level of service at Royal Poinciana Street is not changed by this development. The level of service at Lunapule Road is not changed by this development. H. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT A. Site Location The proposed development is located in Kailua-Kona, Hawaii on the mauka side of Alii Drive approximately one and one-half miles south of Lunapule Road and approximately one-half mile north of Royal Poinciana Street. The tax map key is TMK (3)7-5-020:71 & 72. Current planning is for a 59 -unit single-family development containing some open space with recreational amenities. Page 1 of 9 ' III. STUDY AREA CONDITIONS A. Study Area ' The area of the proposed development is surrounded by areas of condominiums, hotels, vacation rental developments with some single-family and multi -family ' housing. There are currently other developments being proposed or under construction in this area. ' Since traffic from this development could have some impact on the adjacent streets, Lunapule Road and Royal Poinciana Street are considered in this report. It is ' expected that there will be additional mauka-makai connecting streets constructed in the foreseeable future. These will, in all likelihood, alleviate any impact that may occur at the above mentioned intersections. ' B. Site Accessibility I This site is accessed from Alii Drive. Traffic to and from the development will use Alii Drive and Lunapule Road and Royal Poinciana Street to Alii Drive. ' C. Land Use The site is currently vacant land zoned Resort. In the past it has been used for cattle ' pens and cattle watering. IV. ANALYSIS OF EXISTING CONDITIONS A. Physical Characteristics ' Alii Drive is a two-lane road running north and south along the ocean side of Kailua- Kona, Hawaii. This road has paved shoulders which are used by pedestrians and ' bicyclists. There are no sidewalks. The speed limit is 30 mph. There is transit service serving this area. However, pedestrian traffic and transit service were not considered in this study. It should be noted that if transit service is taken into consideration, then ' the trip generations would be reduced. B. Traffic Volumes ' Traffic counts were taken at the intersection of Lunapule Road and Alii Drive and at the intersection of Royal Poinciana Street and Alii Drive on Tuesday, August 19, 1 2003. The period of the counts was from 6:30 AM to 9:00 AM and from 3:00 PM to 6:00 PM. The peak hours were determined and are tabulated below and are also compared to counts taken on Thursday, September 21, 2000. Page 2 of 9 0 • ' TABLE 1 PEAK HOURS OF TRAFFIC FLOW Location Time Vehicles Per Hour (vph) Vehicles Per Hour (vph) 2003 Alii Dr & Royal Poinciana 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM 945 1002 Alii Dr & Royal Poinciana 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM 1133 1116 Alii Dr & Lunapule Road 7:15 AM to 8:15 AM 1 785 1 1038 Alii Dr & Lunapule Road 4:15 PM to 5:15 PM 1 978 1 1237 The following table gives a breakdown of each peak traffic period at the two locations by traffic movement. TABLE 2 TRAFFIC COUNTS AND TURNING MOVEMENTS FOR PEAK HOURS Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street Direction AM PM Northbound Through 270 372 Northbound Right 77 81 Southbound Left 111 104 Southbound Through 220 360 Westbound Left 104 117 Westbound Right 220 82 Alii Drive and Lunapule road Northbound Through 484 503 Northbound Right 144 80 Southbound Left 3 19 Southbound Through 292 479 Westbound Left 97 132 Westbound Right 18 24 Page 3 of 9 I � A 1 1 C. Level of Service Levels of service were calculated for these intersections using the data gathered on 1 August 19, 2003. The following table shows the existing conditions. TABLE 3 1 LEVELS OF SERVICES, EXISTING CONDITIONS, PEAK HOURS 2000 Vs 2003 1 1 L 1 1 V. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 Direction Level of Service Level of Service Royal Poinciana Street Lunapule Road AM PM AM PM 2000 2003 2000 2003 2000 2003 2000 2003 Westbound C C E D C C C E Southbound A A A A A A A A PROJECTED TRAFFIC A. Methodology Highway capacity analysis was performed in accordance with the "Highway Capacity Manual, Special Report 209, 2"" Edition" ofthe Transportation Research Board, 1992 and the Highway Capacity Software from the Federal Highway Administration and McTrans, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida. Levels of service for the various intersections were computed for the existing condition in accordance with the Highway Capacity Manual. Level of service is defined as "a qualitative measure describing operational conditions within a traffic stream; generally described in terms of such factors as speed and travel time, freedom to maneuver, traffic interruptions, comfort and convenience, and safety." There are six levels of operational conditions defined as follows: Level of Service A Level of Service B Level of Service C Level of Service D Level of Service E Level of Service F Little or no traffic delays Short traffic delays Average traffic delays Long traffic delays Very long traffic delays Extreme traffic delays Page 4 of 9 W • Level of service calculations and volume -capacity -ratios are tabulated herein for both AM and PM peaks for existing and the post development condition. Each intersection is diagramed in the appendix showing existing and post development conditions. The trip generation methodology used in this report is based upon applications developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and published in "Trip Generation", 5' Edition, 1991. Trip generations have been developed for a variety of land uses (or facility types) which correlate trips with dwelling units, area, population, vehicle ownership and intensity of use. Each facility type has a catalog number for identification purposes. In this case, 210, single-family dwelling was used. It should be noted that no adjustments are made to reflect the impact of less than full- time residents which would be normal for a condominium in the study area. B. Trip Generation As stated above, this is a condominium development, therefore, Classification 210, or Single -Family Dwelling was used for trip generation. Since the peak hour trips for this development generate less than 100 peak hour trips, the horizon is the opening year. The following are the trips generated. TABLE 4 TRIP GENERATION Time I Quantity Generation Entering Exiting AM 59 0.74 11 26% 32 59 1.01 39 65% 21 ],7140/loPM % Daily 59 9.48 _ 559 C. Traffic Distribution Traffic counts were also taken on Alii Drive at the site of the proposed development. The following is a breakdown of those counts. Page 5 of 9 1i D. 00 A Table 5 Traffic Distribution Direction AM (%) PM (0/0) PM Count % Northbound Right 7 Northbound 613 62 V 50.2 Southbound 374 38 49.8 Total 987 20 The turning movements from the project are based upon these percentages and are as follows: TABLE 6 TURNING MOVEMENTS FOR LEHUA LANI PLANNED DEVELOPMENT The existing turning movements at Royal Poinciana Street and Lunapule Road were used to proportion the traffic within these intersections, thereby distributing traffic generated by the development. Trip Assignments Trips were assigned in accordance with the above traffic distribution discussion. For comparison purposes, the distribution and assignment is shown for the existing condition and future condition in the following table. Page 6 of 9 Direction AM PM ENTERING Northbound Right 7 20 Southbound Left 4 19 EXITING Westbound Left 12 10 Westbound Right 20 11 The existing turning movements at Royal Poinciana Street and Lunapule Road were used to proportion the traffic within these intersections, thereby distributing traffic generated by the development. Trip Assignments Trips were assigned in accordance with the above traffic distribution discussion. For comparison purposes, the distribution and assignment is shown for the existing condition and future condition in the following table. Page 6 of 9 0 1 w TABLE 7 TRIP DISTRIBUTION AND ASSIGNMENT Direction LLQ PM 2000 2003 Future 2000 2003 Future ROYAL POINCIANA STREET AND ALIT DRIVE Northbound Through 274 270 274 334 372 i 388 Northbound Right 95 77 77 118 81 81 Southbound Left 72 ill 115 102 360 106 Southbound Through 179 220 228 337 104 360 Westbound Left 116 104 104 145 117 117 Westbound Right 209 220 233 97 82 86 Total VPH 945 1002 1021 1133 1116 1138 LUNAPULE ROAD AND ALIT DRrVE Northbound Through 417 484 499 388 503 512 Northbound Right 63 144 149 50 80 82 Southbound Left 19 3 3 21 19 19 Southbound Through 214 292 298 386 479 494 Westbound Left 59 97 98 115 132 136 Westbound Right 13 18 18 18 24 24 Total VPH 785 1038 1065 978 1237 1267 AT THE DEVELOPMENT Northbound Through 613 613 514 514 Northbound Right ---- 7 ---- 20 Southbound Left ---- 4 ---- 19 Southbound Through 374 374 510 510 Westbound Left 12 --- 10 Westbound Right 18 11 Page 7 of 9 1 0 0 1 ' It should be noted that the total traffic count at the intersection of Royal Poinciana Street and AN Drive has changed little since 2000, however, the turning movement distribution has changed. This could be due in part to the speed bumps which have been placed on Royal ' Poinciana for the slowing of traffic. People may be taking another route. It should also be noted that there has been a considerable increase in traffic at the intersection ' of Lunapule Road and Alii Drive between 2000 and 2003. This is probably due to the build- out of the Alii Lani development, Sea Ridge development, and Kona Hawaiian Village. To ' a much lesser degree, some rerouting of traffic is due to other influences. VL TRAFFIC AND IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS I 1 d 1 I Level of service was performed for the existing and future conditions for the intersections at Royal Poinciana Street and at Lunapule Road. This analysis was also performed for the proposed entry of this development with and without a left turn lane southbound. The following table shows the levels of service comparison of providing a left turn lane and not providing a left turn lane at the development. TABLE 8 LEVELS OF SERVICE COMPARISON Direction AM PM 2000 2003 1 Future 2000 2003 Future ROYAL PONCIANA STREET AND ALIT DRIVE Westbound C C C E D D Southbound A A A A A A Intersection LOS C C D D Approach Delay 21.4 22.2 30.8 33.1 LUNAPULE ROAD AND ALII DRIVE Westbound Southbound Intersection Delay Approach Delay Page 8 of 9 W PROJECT INTERSECTION W Direction AM PM w/o Left Lane w/Left Lane w/o Left Lane w/ Left Lane Westbound C C C C Southbound A A A A Intersection LOS C C C C Approach Delay 15.4 15.4 16.1 16.1 VII. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS The levels of service at the intersections of Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street and Alii Drive and Lunapule Road are not significantly impacted by this development. In the case of Lunapule Road, the intersection has been impacted seriously by several developments, whereas, these developments seem to have little impact on the intersection of Royal Ponciana and Alii Drive. In the case of requiring a left turn lane for the development, it cannot be shown why this would be necessary since the level of service and approach delay remain the same. Therefore, it is recommended that no left turn improvements be required. The same holds true at Alii Drive and Royal Poinciana Street. Adding a left turn lane at Lunapule Road still leaves the intersection westbound with a level of service of "E". Page 9 of 9 I 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 APPENDIX A LOCATION MAP & TAX MAP KEY MAP )CATION 40 w OWN WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP 751 kuokWHay Ste. 106 Comullinq C'vi Cnglnur� rkono Waoii�6740 Com Vuc lion Mmogen 1 334 b322 LOCATION MAP J Il L 1 AA PP� .1 , 2� 7- z IWh raw Ft < `4A -r j4 42 rA P"j --- Z-&7. 1-11.,. fA L7 A. J631 - -- - -1 '1&.1%-' 5 4, Jr _6W njveo 704: �26e- t� 76 "17, 2 34 42 J.Paty Z. AlMo L4 a -d'67 A— - ----------- o, -.rzz -4/- L 7 22 4 24 '7".f fa JJ.A.f LaJA a "All KA ti D 211oreA GAD ',t-,qA ,L AT C !1 3 A'. P1 A;r 17 D W01 4 0?-. - A 62.V. 4 CX cv. r 60 A i of Its 72 '4j" T r CL Q) All. 18'e AN 70 2-A 7 ea ff&—e P. 6-11fy 02 66 A SA 7 -"Se 01 12, gx_ e.,-". 9r8A r-." >01, 30 '117VE t;/. 19 7 77 pLAT 74 C.A wo.m /1,7' 2 4--ttcA dr L.C.Aw. oj/rlr!� f% PUAPUAA I ST 2 ND�� TAXA.T10N,?AAPS BUREAU UNLOCAT : TERRITORY OF HAWAII AP, OWNER I AREA I TITLE Y TAX MAP 0 oq,4 A :f� - �- L. " - 1�•\ 7rl le 84 - -i-114IRD DIVISION ONE 17 SEC. PC I fL.,4 r A 7- 0 -A-1 r ®TACH CONTAINING PARCELS SURIEU TO CHAAGE I IN.= 200 FT I -or. PuArlsr•A'- cp�= N. KONA, HAWAII. C] 10 APPENDIX B LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA LEVEL OF SERVICE CRITERIA AVERAGE TOTAL LEVEL OF EXPECTED DELAY TO DELAY (SecondsNehicle) SERVICE MINOR STREET TRAFFIC z5 A Little or no delay 5.1 to 10.0 B Short traffic delays 10.1 to 20.0 C Average traffic delays 20.1 to 30.0 D Long traffic delays 30.1 to 45.0 E Very long traffic delays >45 F Extreme traffic delays Appendix B op w APPENDIX C LEVEL OF SERVICE ALII DRIVE & ROYAL POINCIANA STREET ' HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 'Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 nalysis Time Period: AM peak existing Intersection: tee urisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana orth/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 ' Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 E L T R L T R Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 'Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? ,Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? Movement 7 L Peak Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles ,Percent Grade (4) Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage ERT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Delay, Approach NB Movement 1 Lane Config 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 270 77 111 220 -- -- 0 -- 1 0 0 1 TR A LT No No bound Eastboun 8 9 I 10 11 T R L T 1.00 1.00 1.00 104 0 220 0 0 0 0 No 0 1 0 LTR Queue Length, and Level SB Westbound 4 I 7 8 LT LTR. :=v �vyuj i C(m) (vph) -- 1223 542 ` v/c 0.09 0.60 ' 954 queue length 0.30 8.2 4.29 21.4 ' control Delay LOS A C Approach Delay 21.4 Approach LOS C �., HCS2000: Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. ,tWitcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 r 12 R of Service Eastbound 9 10 11 12 Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 M W E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak existing Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 270 77 111 220 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 68 19 28 55 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 270 77 111 220 Percent Heavy vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute volume Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (B) Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 1.00 1.00 1.00 26 0 55 104 0 220 0 0 0 4.0 0 4.0 No 1 0 LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13 14 15 16 Flow (ped hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Balking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through 55 Left -Turn Through worksheet 3 -Data -for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 'Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: Number of major street through lanes: 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation 0 0 1700 1700 1 Critics al Gap Calculation 2.20 0.90 0.90 3.50 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 t(f,HV) 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 'Movement 2.2 L L L T R L T R t(c,base) 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 (c,hv) tc 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ;'t(P(hv) 0 0 0.20 0 0.20 0 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 B) Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,1t) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 n(c,T): 1 -stage 2 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 t(c) -stage 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 2 -stage 0 ow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R 4 00 3 30 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals Oomputation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream signai Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) prog otal Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type ffective Green, g (sec) ycle Length, C (sec) p (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P (ql) �(q (q)) omputation -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) alpha eta ravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f ax platooned flow, V(c,max) in platooned flow, V(c,min) uration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 omputation -P atoon Event Periods Result IF p(2) 0.000 (5) 0.000 (dom) (subo) Constrained or unconstrained? ( ,base) 2.20 0.90 0.90 3.50 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 t(f,HV) P(HV) 0 0 0 0 c st(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals Oomputation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream signai Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) prog otal Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type ffective Green, g (sec) ycle Length, C (sec) p (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P (ql) �(q (q)) omputation -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) alpha eta ravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f ax platooned flow, V(c,max) in platooned flow, V(c,min) uration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 omputation -P atoon Event Periods Result IF p(2) 0.000 (5) 0.000 (dom) (subo) Constrained or unconstrained? 0 0 for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 T. L L T R L T R c r,x C plat,x Two -Stage Process � g 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c, x) s 1700 1700 P(x) V(c, u, x) `mak+ -I C(plat,x) Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 308 Potential Capacity 737 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 737 Probability of Queue free St. - 0.70 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows - 3471 Potential Capacity 1223 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 1223 Probability of Queue free St. 0.91 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.90 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Potential Capacity 342 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.90 0.90 Movement Capacity 306 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 750 Potential Capacity 382 - Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.90 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.92 Movement Capacity 347 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance rom 'OPart 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity ''Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity .Probability of Queue free St. ,OPart 2 --second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity 'Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 750 Potential Capacity 342 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.90 0.90 ,Cap. ovement Capacity 306 i Result for 2 stage process: aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. a t C t 306 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 ep 4: LT from Minor sc. Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows f�otential Capacity edestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity art 2 Second Stage L Conflicting Flows otential Capacity edestrian Impedance Factor ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity 3 - Single Stage Tart onflicting Flows 750 Potential Capacity 382 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 aj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.90 aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.92 f Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.91 0.65 Movement Capacity 347 e process: I t 347 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations 5ovement - 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 L T R L T R ity (vph) 347 306 737 1P W Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep Jy, Juo ,J, volume 104 0 220 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max C eh 542 SUM C Sep n C act Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) 111 324 C(m) (vph) 1223 542 v/c 0.09 0.60 95% queue length 0.30 4.29 Control Delay 8.2 21.4 LOS A C Approach Delay 21.4 Approach LOS C Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 P(o)) 1.VV V.71 v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 220 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 S(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2),. Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 P'(oj) 0.90 9(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.2 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 9(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 _ 0.9 u • HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 0 Analyst: HEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PH peak existing Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments -' Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 372 81 104 360 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 .. Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 372 81 104 360 Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- fercent edian Type Undivided T Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT ,lUpstream Signal? No No Movement Peak Hour Factor, PHF 'Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (8) Mediad Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes =Configuration 1.00 1.00 1.00 117 0 82 0 0 0 0 No 1 0 LTR 10 11 12 L T R Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service ApproacH NB SB Westbound Eastbound 'Movement 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR -_- ' C(m) (vph) v/c 958 queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 1118 337 0.09 0.59 0.31 4.08 8.6 30.8 A D 30.8 D BCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 'Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place �Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 0 E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW 81 Agency/Co.: Farleigh Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Date Performed: 08/22/2003 1.00 Analysis Time Period: PM peak existing 93 Intersection: tee 90 Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co 81 Analysis Year: 2003 Percent Heavy Vehicles Project ID: 435-OIT-03 -- East/West Street: Royal Poinciana Median Type Undivided North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 L T R L T R Volume 372 81 104 36C Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 93 20 26 90 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 372 81 104 360 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute Volume Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (8) Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 1.00 1.00 1.00 29 0 20 117 0 82 0 0 0 4.0 0 4.0 No 1 0 LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13 14 15 16 Flow (ped hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Balking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through 35 Left -Turn Through worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major -street Vehicles — Movement 2 Movement 5 1 0 0 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 Number of major street through lanes: 1 ', Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation critical Gap Calculation ' Movement- 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c,base) 4.1 7.1 6.5 6 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1 't(c,hv) P(hv) 0 0 0 0 t(c,g) 1 4 0.20 0.20 0 Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0 t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6 2 -stage ' t(f) 2.2 3.5 00 1.00 10 0.20 00 0.00 00 00 0.00 00 1.00 2 H H L*L�w.re, 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals r' Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type JEffective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P 9(91) 'g(g2) g(g) ,,computation 2 -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f ,'Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) L Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 -p(1) U.000 p(5) - 0.000 - p(dom) p(subo) Constrained or unconstrained? ' Proportion Follow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R �J t( ,base) 2.20 3.50 -4. U0 3.30 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HV) 0 0 0 0 ' t(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals r' Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type JEffective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P 9(91) 'g(g2) g(g) ,,computation 2 -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f ,'Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) L Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 -p(1) U.000 p(5) - 0.000 - p(dom) p(subo) Constrained or unconstrained? ' Proportion 1p W for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II P(1) p(4) P(7) p(8) P(9) POO) P(11) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x e PX V c,u,X c r,x C plat,x rocess 7 8 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c,x) s 1700 1700 P(x) V(c, u, x) ,x) Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 412 Potential Capacity 644 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement capacity 644 Probability of Queue free St. 0.87 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows - 453 Potential Capacity 1118 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 1118 Probability of Queue free St. 0.91 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.88 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Conflicting Flows 980 ?otential Capacity 252 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.88 0.88 Movement Capacity 222 ?robability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 980 ?otential Capacity 279 - ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.88 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.91 Movement Capacity 253 E worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance ,Step j: Tn rrum nrnur au. —Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows otential Capacity ede§trian Impedance Factor ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. art 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Eotential Capacity edeatrian Impedance Factor ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity art 3 - Single Stage onflicting Flows Potential capacity �Pedeatrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt �.fovement Capacity 980 252 1.00 0.88 222 ��RaRaRayesult for 2 stage process: - C t 222 .Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 .Step 4: LT rrom Minor SL. Part - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity 1.00 0.88 1.00 Cdri c - aca:uuu a�cyc Conflicting Flows otential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity l art 3 - Single Stage conflicting Flows 980 _ Potential Capacity 279 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 aj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.88 aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.91 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.91 0.79 11Movement Capacity 253 a 1C t s for Two-stage process: at 8 -Shared Lane Calculations 253 Movement S 7 lu 11 1L L T R L T -` R 117 0 62 ity (vph) 253 222 644 W • Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep 253 222 644 Volume 117 0 82 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max C sh SUM C Sep n C act 337 Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) 104 199 C(m) (vph) 1118 337 v/c 0.09 0.59 958 queue length 0.31 4.08 Control Delay 8.6 30.8 LOS A D Approach Delay 30.8 Approach LOS D Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 P(o)) -.,- v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 360 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 5(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 e*loj> 0.88 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.6 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 1.0 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: BEW 'Agency/CO.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak future Intersection: tee ;'Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana 'North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hre): 1.00 v wpcy C(m) (vph) v/c 959 queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS J 1219 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments 0.61 0.31 Major Street: Approach 8.3 Northbound A C Southbound 22.2 Movement 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 274 115 228 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 11. . 00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 274 77 115 228 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 ---- Median Type Undivided i RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT ' Upstream Signal? No No t Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ume 104 0 223 t.Vo Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 104 0 223 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (8) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage I RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR j Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approac NB SB Westbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v wpcy C(m) (vph) v/c 959 queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS J 1219 534 0.09 0.61 0.31 4.54 8.3 22.2 A C 22.2 C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 ' Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place ' Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 lop W E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak future Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 274 77 115 228 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 68 19 29 57 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 274 77 115 228 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided _ Flared Approach: Exists? RT Channelized? Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR 1 LT Configuration Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R volume lvY 0 0 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 26 0 56 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 104 0 223 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade ($) 0 0 Median Storage _ Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13 14 15 16 Flow (ped hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data .for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 ' Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap calcu at ion Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 4 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 11 Number of major street through lanes: 1 ' Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap calcu at ion Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c,base) 4.1 7.1 6.5 6.2 t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 'P(hv) 0 0 0 0 t(c,g) 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 t(c,T): 1 -Stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 �.' 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 2 -stage Calculations Follow -Up Time Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R '' t( ,base) 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HV) 0 0 0 0 Et(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals nce Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type 'Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P g(gl) ' g(g2) g(g) Computation 2 -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) alpha beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f 'Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 computation 3 -Plat Event Periods Resu t p(2) 0.000 'p(5) 0.000 _ p(dom) p(subo) - Constrained or unconstrained? IProportion 10 1 W for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II p(4) p(7) p(8) P(9) P(10) P(II) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R v c,x s Px V c,u,x * r,x C plat,x Two -Stage Process 7 B 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 v(c,x) B 1700 1700 P(x) V(C,n,x) r,x C(plat,x) Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows - 312 Potential Capacity 733 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 733 Probability of Queue free St. 0.70 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows 351 Potential Capacity 1219 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement capacity 1219 Probability of Queue free St. 0.91 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.89 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Potential Capacity 333 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.89 0.89 Movement capacity 297 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 conflicting Flows 770 Potential Capacity 372 - Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Naj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.89 Naj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.92 Movement Capacity 337 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance 'Step 3: TM from Minor St. B 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Capacity 'Potential Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. 1 Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity .,Part 3 - Single Stage 770 Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity 333 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 - 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.89 0.89 Movement Capacity 297 Result for 2 stage process: a y C t 297 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 ` Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity i' Pedestrian Impedance Factor ' Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt ,lMovement Capacity Part 2 - Secon Stage • Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj: factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 770 Potential Capacity 372 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 .'Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor Factor. 0.89 0.92 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.91 0.64 Movement Capacity 337 ;, Results for Two-stage process: y C 337 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations Movement - 7 8 9 10 1] 1 L T R L T R ity (vph) 337 297 733 0 W Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep 337 297 733 volume 104 0 223 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max C sh SUM C Sep n C act 534 Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement - 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) 115 327 C(m) (vph) 1219 534 vac 0.09 0.61 958 queue length 0.31 4.54 Control Delay 8.3 22.2 LOS A C Approach Delay 22.2 Approach LOS C Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 p(o3) 1.00 0.91 v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 228 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 P*(oj) 0.89 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.3 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.91 I .1 0 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY 0 Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments J Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R Analyst: HEW 106 Agency/CO.: Farleigh 1.00 Date Performed: 08/22/2003 1.00 Analysis Time Period: PM peak future 81 Intersection: tee Percent Heavy Vehicles Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co 'Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana North/South Street: Alii Dr Lanes 1 0 Intersection Orientation: NS 0 Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments J Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R ■ Peak Hour Factor, PHF !'Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade ($) '- Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes ssConf igurat ion 1.00 1.00 1.00 117 0 86 0 0 0 0 hC 1 0 LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement - 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 U f ane Config LT LTR v (vph) 106 203 c(m) (vph) 1103 329 v/c 0.10 0.62 95%queuelength 0.32 4.51 Control Delay 8.6 33.1 'LOS A D Approach Delay 33.1 Approach LOS D HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place 'Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 398 81 106 368 ,,volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 388 81 106 368 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 - Median Type- Undivided .J RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT 'Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approac Westbound Eastbound ' Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 M,- L T R L T R ■ Peak Hour Factor, PHF !'Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade ($) '- Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes ssConf igurat ion 1.00 1.00 1.00 117 0 86 0 0 0 0 hC 1 0 LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement - 1 4 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 U f ane Config LT LTR v (vph) 106 203 c(m) (vph) 1103 329 v/c 0.10 0.62 95%queuelength 0.32 4.51 Control Delay 8.6 33.1 'LOS A D Approach Delay 33.1 Approach LOS D HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place 'Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 E-Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PM peak future Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Royal Poinciana North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R volume 388 81 106 368 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 97 20 26 92 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 388 81 106 368 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -' 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute Volume Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (8) Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 1.00 1.00 1.00 29 0 22 117 0 86 0 0 0 4.0 0 4.0 No 1 0 LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13 14 15 16 Flow (ped hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 -' Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation ,Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c, ase) 4.1 0 0 _1 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 t(c,hv) 1.00 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 1.00 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 ' -P(hv) Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 .Number of major street through lanes: 1 -' Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation ,Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c, ase) 4.1 -/.1 b.� b.L t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 ' -P(hv) 0 0 0.20 0 0.20 0 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 t(c,g) Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,1t) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 -' t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 0.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 _ 2 -stage Follow -Up Time calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R a(f,base) 2.20 3.bu 4.uu J.JU t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 - P(HV) 0 0 0 0 Et(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 .- Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals ,Computation 1 -Queue clearance rime aL up5Lream aryl)=. Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Wprog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type ffective Green, g (sec) ycle Length, C (sec) p (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P (ql) (q2) (q) C Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Orravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f ax platooned flow, V(c,max) in platooned flow, V(c,min) uration of blocked period, t(p) -- Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 plc/ - 5) 0.000 (dom) (- (subo)) - Constrained or unconstrained? W W for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II P(4) p(7) p(8) P(9) P(10) P(11) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x 469 1008 1008 428 s Px V c,u,x C r,x C plat,x age Process 7 8 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 v(c,x) a 1700 1700 P(x) V(C,U,x) c(r,x) C(plat,x) Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 428 Potential Capacity 631 1.00 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 631 1.00 Probability of Queue free St. 0.86 1.00 Step 2: LT rom Mal or St. 4 1 Conflicting F ows 469 Potential Capacity 1103 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 1103 Probability of Queue free St. 0.90 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.88 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Conflicting Flows 1008 Potential Capacity 242 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.88 0.88 4ovement Capacity 212 1.00 1.00 Probability of Queue free St. itep 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 1008 Potential Capacity 269 _ Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 daj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.88 4aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.91 1 � • Movement Capacity 243 'Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 ' Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity 'Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. ' Part 2 - Secon Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity ,'Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Conflicting Flows 1008 Potential Capacity 242 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 JCap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.88 0.88 Movement Capacity 212 Result for 2 stage process: a y 212 C t Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step : LT from Minor St. 7 10 Part 1 - First Stage ftConflicting Flows 'Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj.. factor due to Impeding mvmnt =Movement Capacity Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity ,Conflicting "Flows 1008 Potential Capacity 269 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.88 aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.91 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.90 0.78 Movement Capacity 243 243 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations irovement - 7 B 9 10 11 1 L T R L T R ty (vph) 243 212 631 0 0 Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep 243 212 631 Volume 117 0 86 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max C sh SUM C Sep n C act 329 Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) 106 203 C(m) (vph) 1103 329 v/c 0.10 0.62 959 queue length 0.32 4.51 Control Delay 8.6 33.1 LOS A D Approach Delay 33.1 Approach LOS D Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 P(o3) �. v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 368 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 P*(03) 0.88 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.6 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 1.1 • APPENDIX D LEVEL OF SERVICE ALII DRIVE & LUNAPULE ROAD It L' f� I, t * • HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak existing Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R Volume 484 144 3 292 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 484 144 3 292 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided Median Storage RT Channelized? Exists? No Lanes 1 0 RT Channelized? 0 1 Configuration TR Lanes LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume Delay, �1 Length, and Level of Service Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 97 0 18 Percent Heavy Vehicles Lane Config 0 0 0 Percent Grade (8) 20.2 Approach LOS 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR v (vpn) C(m) (vph) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 - 9 10 11 12 Lane Config C LT LTR 20.2 v (vpn) C(m) (vph) 964 --- 352 v/c 0.00 0.33 95% queue length 0.01 1.44 Control Delay 8.7 20.2 LOS A C Approach Delay 20.2 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 E-Mail: 0 bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak existing Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 ` East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr I' Intersection Orientation: NS Ci Study period (hrs): 1.00 l�Peak Hour Factor, PHF Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Peak -15 Minute Volume 24 Ma or Street Movements 1 2 3 4 L 5 T 6 R 0 L T R 0 i Flared Approach: Exists? No volume { Storage RT Channelized? - 484 144 3 292 0 r, Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 0 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 121 36 1 73 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 484 144 3 292 Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided -- -- 0 -- -- I' RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No t Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R l�Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 24 0 4 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 97 0 18 ( Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (8) 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No { Storage RT Channelized? Ij Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR - Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustme Movements 13 14 15 46 [ Lane Width (ft) Walking Speed (ft/sec) +' Percent Blockage 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 0 0 0 0 L Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance j Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet S2 Le t -Turn Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major street Vehicles ' Movement -f Movement 5 0 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 Number of major street through lanes: 1 Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c,Dase) 1.00 1.00 t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 P(hv) 0.20 0 t(c,g) 0.00 0.00 Grade/100 0.00 0.00 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.00 t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 0.00 6.4 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 2 -stage 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 6.4 6.5 6.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 Follow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R r(r,Dabu) r.. _ ....... ..__ -.-_ t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HV) 0 0 0 0 t(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signa Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P g(gl) g(g2) g(g) F-lizz o TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 Computation 3-P atoon Event Periods Result Nde) 0.000 P(5) p(dom) - p(subo) Constrained or unconstrained? ' 0 A for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process .' movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II p(4) 'p(7) P(8) P(9) P(10) 'p(ll) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 i' Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R I'V c,x 628 854 854 556 s ' Px V c,u,x J C r,x C plat,x ' Two -Stage Process 7 B 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c,x) s 1700 1700 P(x) V(o,n,x) (r, x) (plat,x) 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Potential Capacity - 534 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement capacity 534 Probability of Queue free St. 0.97 1.00 i'ConriicLing riuwe --- Potential Capacity 964 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 964 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 ,, Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. - 1.00 Step 3: TH rom Minor St. a. 11 'Con actingCapacF ows potential ity I Pedestrian Impedance Cap. Adj. factor due �' Movement Capacity Probability of Queue 298 Factor 1.00 1.00 to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 297 free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 ■ Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor 'Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 332 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 a 0 Movement Capacity 331 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 854 Potential Capacity 298 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 297 Result for 2 stage process: a y C t 2 97 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 854 Potential Capacity 332 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 0.96 Movement Capacity 331 Results for Two-stage process: y C t 331 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R.— Volume (vpn) 11 - Movement Capacity (vph) 331 297 534 ' Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep 331 297 534 Volume 97 0 is Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) .n max C sh SUM C Sep n 'C act 352 f Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service �' Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) ' C(m) (vph) v/C 95% queue length 'l Control Delay LOS j Approach Delay _ Approach LOS 964 352 0.00 0.33 0.01 1.44 8.7 20.2 A C stream 3 or 6 20.2 J C Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay P(o3) 1.uu �..... 292 v(il), volume for stream 2 or 5 0 v(12), volume for stream 3 or 6 1700 J s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 f`(oj) d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 1.00 s.7 � N, Number of major street through lanes i 0.0 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 t HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PM peak existing Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Vehicle Major Street: Approach Movement 1 L 1P Study period (hrs): 1.00 Volumes and Adjustments Northbound Southbound 2 3 I 4 5 6 T R L T R volume 503 80 19 479 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 503 80 19 479 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided E 0 0 RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 No 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound 0 1 Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R Volume Delay, 132 0 24 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 132 0 24 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade ($) E 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR C(m) (vph) Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config E LT LTR 36.7 C(m) (vph) 1001 268 v/c 0.02 0.58 958 queue length 0.06 3.91 Control Delay 8.7 36.7 LOS A E Approach Delay 36.7 Approach LOS E HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP —' 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 t • • E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net r TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma3or Street Movements Analyst: BEW 3 Agency/Co.: Farleigh o Date Performed: 08/22/2003 PM existing T Analysis Time Period: peak T Intersection: tee 132 Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc f' Year: 2003 'Analysis Project ID: 435-01T-03 503 ___0_19 East/West Street: Lunapuli 479 North/South Street: Alii Dr Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Intersection orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Ma3or Street Movements 1 2 3 4 D o r, L T R L T R Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 132 0 24 f' Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 Volume 0 503 ___0_19 Percent Grade M 479 0 • Median Storage Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 , ' Peak -15 Minute Volume 126 20 5 120 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR - Lanes 503 80 19 479 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Type Undivided 'Median RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 - Configuration TR LT Signal? No No JUpstream Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R I' Volume 132 0 24 !. Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 i - Peak -15 Minute Volume 33 0 6 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 132 0 24 f' Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade M 0 0 • Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? - Lanes 0 1 0 .Configuration LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustment 13 14 15 16 .�.... 'r__,.__(fr Lane Width t) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 fercent Blockage 0 0 0 0 ' Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance ' Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major street Vehicle`s Movement 2 Movement 5 for minor movements, p(x) P(1) p(4) P(7) P(8) P(9) p(10) p(11) p(12) Single -stage Process Two -Stage Process Stage I Stage II W Computation 4 and 5 single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x 583 1060 1060 543 a Px V c,u,x r,x C plat,x rocess 7 g 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 ✓(c,x) 3 1700 1700 ?(x) ✓(c,u,x) (r, X) J(plat, x) 9orksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 ?otential Capacity 544 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 4ovement capacity 544 ?robability of Queue free St. 0.96 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 ;onflicting F owe - 583. ?otential Capacity 1001 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 4ovement Capacity 1001 ?robability of Queue free St. 0.98 1.00 4aj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.97 ;tep 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Jon acting Flows 1060 ?otential Capacity 226 ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Jap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 4ovement Capacity 220 ?robability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 ;tep 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Jonf11ct1ng Flows _ 1060 ?otential Capacity 250 - ?edestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 4aj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 4aj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 ,1 0 0 Movement capacity 245 N�orksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance mart i - rirsc stage Conflicting Flows Capacity edestrian Impedance faotential Factor p. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity probability of Queue free St. Part 3 - Single Stage PFart - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Conflicting Flows i_ Potential Capacity Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor .otential edeetrian Impedance Factor ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 Movement Capacity L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 i. Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.98 art 3 - Single Stage Rovement Capacity - 245 onflicting Flows 1060 Potential Capacity 226 edeetrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 ovement-Capacity 220 eeulL IOr L Uiage PrUUUaU; C t 220 .Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 ptep-a: Lw rrom minor st. Part 1 - First Stage onflicting Flows. otential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity 1.00 -rart t - secona stage t -Conflicting Flows Capacity ;'Potential Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt L Movement Capacity 1 Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 1060 i_ Potential Capacity 250 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 J. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 i. Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.98 0.94 Rovement Capacity - 245 - - a t s; Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations ume (vpn) ement Capacity (vph) 245 L T R L T R 245 220 544 0 4P Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 it 12 L T R L T R C Sep 1�1 « � volume 132 0 24 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max C sh 268 SUM C Sep n C act Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR C(m)p(vph) 1001 268 v/c 0.02 0.58 95% queue length 0.06 - 3.91 Control Delay 8.7 36.7 LOS A E Approach Delay 36.7 Approach LOS E Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 P(03) �..,,, _.... v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 479 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 P'(oj) 0.97 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.7 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.2 I HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY • Analyst: BEW 'Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak future Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr ' Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hre): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach .Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1:00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 499 149 3 295 Percent Heavy vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT 'Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 M L T R L T R Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 ,Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 98 0 18 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) 0 0 Median Storage 'Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage f RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 .Conficuration LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approac NB SB Westbound Eastbound lMovement 1 4 17 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR i v '(vph) 3 116 C(m) (vph) 947 341 v/c 0.00 0.34 95% queue length 0.01 1.53 Control Delay 8.8 21.0 OS A C Approach Delay 21.0 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 ruce E. Witcher, P.E. itcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place 'Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW 149 Agency/Co.: Farleigh Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Date Performed: 08/22/2003 1.00 Analysis Time Period: AM peak future 125 Intersection: tee 74 Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co 149 Analysis Year: 2003 Percent Heavy Vehicles Project ID: 435-OIT-03 -- 0 East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 1 L T R L T R volume 499 149 3 295 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 125 37 1 74 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 499 149 3 295 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR LT Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R volume Peak Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute Volume Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Percent Grade (i) Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? Storage RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration 1.00 1.00 1.00 24 0 4 98 0 18 0 0 0 0 No 1 0 LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13 14 15- 1,6 Flow (pe hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major -Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 12 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 1700 7 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: T R Number of major street through lanes: I Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation 10 11 12 1 4 7 8 9 L T R 'Movement L L L T R t(c,base) 1.00 4.1 1.00 7.1 1.00 6.5 1.00 6.2 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 t(c,hv) 0 0 0 0 ;P(hv) ,t(c,g) 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 (' 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 2 -stage Movement I L t(f HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HHV)V) t( 0 0 t(f) 2.2 3.5 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals 8 9 10 11 T R L T 4.00 3.30 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0 0 4.0 3.3 12 R Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) INTotal-Saturation Flow Rate, a (vph) -Arrival Type 'Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P '4(ql) g(42) g(4) Computation 2 -Proportion of TWSc Intersectiom Time, blocM Movement 2 V(t) V(l,prot) Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) inTravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 !'Computation 3-P atoon Event Periods Result P(Z) - 0.000 'p(5) p(dom) p(subo) constrained or unconstrained? 'Proportion for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II P(1) p(4) P(7) P(8) P(9) p(10) P(11) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x 648 875 875 574 s Px V c,U,x c r,x C plat,x MO Stagel Stage2 v(c,x) s 1700 P(x) V(c, U, X) vµ n� C(plat,x) 8 10 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 1700 Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations 11 Stagel Stage2 Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 574 Potential Capacity 522 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 522 Probability of Queue free St. 0.97 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 Conflicting Flows - 648 Potential Capacity 947 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 947 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 1.00 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Conflicting Flows 875 Potential Capacity 290 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 289 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 875 Potential Capacity 322 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 Movement Capacity 321 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance 'Step 3: TH Irom Minor St. B 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows 'Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. I Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage j Conflicting Flows 875 potential Capacity 290 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 289 Result for 2 stage process: I( a i y C t 289 —Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt ■ Movement Capacity (--Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 875 Potential capacity 322 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 0.96 _ Movement Capacity 321 process: y321 I ,C t ` Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations !'Movement - 7 8 L T :,Vo ume (vph) 98 0 Movement capacity (vph) 321 289 522 L R 0 0 Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep 1 1. volume 98 0 18 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) C sh 341 SUM C Sep n C act Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR C(m) (vph) v/c 958 queue length Control Delay LOS Approach Delay Approach LOS 947 341 0.00 0.34 0.01 1.53 8.8 21.0 A C 21.0 C Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 295 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 P'(oj) 1.00 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.8 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.0 HCS2000: Unsign• zed Intersections Release 4.1 • TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY ' Intersection Orientation: NS Vehicle Volumes and i Major Street: Approach Northbound ' Movement 1 2 L T 512 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow .Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? Study period (hrs): 1.00 Adjustments Southbound 3 I 4 5 6 R L T R 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 512 82 19 494 -- -- 0 -- 1 0 0 1 TR LT No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound i Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R ume Analyst: HEW 0 Agency/Co.: Farleigh PHF Date Performed: 08/22/2003 1.00 Analysis Time Period: PM peak future 136 Intersection: tee Percent Heavy Vehicles Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc 0 Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 0 tPercent Median Storage East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr ' Intersection Orientation: NS Vehicle Volumes and i Major Street: Approach Northbound ' Movement 1 2 L T 512 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow .Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? Study period (hrs): 1.00 Adjustments Southbound 3 I 4 5 6 R L T R 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 512 82 19 494 -- -- 0 -- 1 0 0 1 TR LT No No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound i Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R ume 992 136 0 24 !'Vo Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 136 0 24 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Grade (9) E 0 0 tPercent Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No ,_. Storage 'RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration l 0 1 0 LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 17 8 - 9 I 10 11 12 —Lane Config LT LTR. —C(m)_ (vph) 992 259 `- v/c 0.02 0.62 queue length 0.06 4.45 ,954 Control Delay 8.7 40.7 LOS A E Approach Delay 40.7 MApproach LOS E 1 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 0 0 E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PM peak future Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Cc Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Lunapuli North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hra): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 L T R L T volume 512 82 19 494 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 128 20 5 124 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 512 82 19 494 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- median -Type Undivided Flared Approach: Exists? RT Channelized? Storage Lanes 1 0 0 1 Configuration TR 1 LT Configuration Upstream Signal? No No Minor Street Movements 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R volume 136 0 24 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 34 0 6 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 136 0 24 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (i) 0 0 Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments Movements 13. 14 15- 3.6 Flow (ped hr) 0 0 0 0 Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet S2 Left -Turn Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles Movement 2 Movement 5 --'Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Ca cu ation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c,base) t(c,hv) 1.00 'P(hv) t(c,g) Grade/100 t(3,1t) f (c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 t(c) I -stage 2 -stage 4.1 /.1 • • 1.00 Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 JSat Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 Number of major street through lanes: I --'Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Ca cu ation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c,base) t(c,hv) 1.00 'P(hv) t(c,g) Grade/100 t(3,1t) f (c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 t(c) I -stage 2 -stage 4.1 /.1 0.0 0.4 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 ( ase) 2.20 3.50 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 3.5 4.0 3.3 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 ` Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream signals omputation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal i OCMovement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) W prog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Affective Green, g (sec) yCle Length, C (sec) ��RRRp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P ��99(ql) f3 (q2) (q) pomputation 2 -Proportion of rwsc lnterscu�Lun II Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) 0 'ETravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F roportion of conflicting flow, f ax platooned flow, V(c,max) in platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) `=Proportion time blocked, p c/ 5) dom) subo) or unconstrained? sm Follow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R ( ase) 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HV) 0 0 0 0 I(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 ` Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream signals omputation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal i OCMovement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) W prog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Affective Green, g (sec) yCle Length, C (sec) ��RRRp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P ��99(ql) f3 (q2) (q) pomputation 2 -Proportion of rwsc lnterscu�Lun II Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) 0 'ETravel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F roportion of conflicting flow, f ax platooned flow, V(c,max) in platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) `=Proportion time blocked, p c/ 5) dom) subo) or unconstrained? sm W V for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II p(4) P(7) P(8) P(9) P(10) P(11) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R V c,x 594 1085 1085 553 s Px V c,u,x C r,x c plat,x Two -Stage Process 7 8 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c,x) 0 1700 1700 P(x) V(c, u, x) c(r,x) C(plat,x) Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Step 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 Conflicting Flows 553 Potential Capacity 537 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 537 Probability of Queue free St. 0.96 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. _ 4 1 Conflicting Flows - 594 Potential Capacity 992 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 992 Probability of Queue free St. 0.98 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.97 Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Conflicting Flows 1085 Potential Capacity 218 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 Movement Capacity 212 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT rom Minor St. 7 10 Conflicting Flows 1085 - Potential Capacity 242 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 0 ' Movement Capacity 237 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance NSteo - : TH from Minor St. 8 11 rarz .i - rirsc bcage Conflicting Flows 'Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. i.—Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows 1.00 Potential Capacity 0.97 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 0.98 0.98 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 237 Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 1085 Potential Capacity 218 Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 ,'Pedestrian Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 Movement Capacity 212 process: C t Probability of Queue free St. rarc 1 - r iraa. al aye Conflicting Flows ( Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj, factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity rarc z - oeconu acaye Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt i Movement Capacity i Potential Capacity 'Pedestrian Impedance Factor Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt MMovement Capacity a t s prUue ; Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations r•., Capacity (vph) 212 1.00 1.00 1085 242 1.00 1.00 0.97 0.98 0.98 0.94 237 237 7 8 9 10 11 —12 L T R L T R 237 212 537 Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R C Sep cam, «t 3u Volume 136 0 24 Delay Q Sep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) n max c sh 259 SUM C Sep n C act Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR V (vpn) .I ...., C(m) (vph) 992 259 v/c 0.02 0.62 95% queue length 0.06 4.45 Control Delay 8.7 40.7 LOS A E Approach Delay 40.7 Approach LOS E Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 p(o)) v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 494 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 p.(oj) 0.97 d(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.7 N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.2 I 0 APPENDIX E LEVEL OF SERVICE 0 DEVELOPMENT ENTRANCE a a HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: BEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak, project Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Project North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS complete Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R volume Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? 1.00 1.00 1.00 613 7 4 -- -- 0 1 0 TR No 1.00 374 0 1 LT No Minor Street: Approach Westbound Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 I 10 11 12 L T R L T R volume 4 +z U LV Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 12 0 20 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (i) 15.4 Approach LOS 0 C Median Storage Flared Approach: Exists? No Storage RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 Configuration LTR Delay, Approach NB Movement 1 Lane Config Queue Length, and LevEl SR Westbound 4 I 7 8 LT LTR 0 of Service I Eastbound 9 1 10 11 12 v (vpn) 4 oc C(m) (vph) 970 378 v/c 0.00 0.08 958 queue length 0.01 0.28 Control Delay 8.7 15.4 LOS A C Approach Delay 15.4 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher,-P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 ' 0 0 E -Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS Analyst: BEW �' Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: AM peak, project complete Intersection: tee ('Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-01T-03 East/West Street: Project ,North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection Orientation: NS Vehicle ,Major Street Movements 1 L I Vo ume ,Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute Volume i Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles Median Type Undivided 1 RT Channelized? Lanes Signal? Study period (hrs): 1.00 Volumes and Adjustments 2 3 4 5 6 T R L T R 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 153 2 1 94 613 7 4 374 -- 0 -- -- 0 0 TR LT No No R Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Peak -15 Minute Volume 3 0 5 'Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 12 0 20 { Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 IL Percent Grade (B) 0 0 Median Storage 'Flared Approach: Exists? No ( Storage ![ RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 'Configuration LTR { Pedestrian Volumes and Adjustments �A/nvomont a 13 14 15 16 _ Lane Wtidth (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 i' Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 R �- Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal j vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn Through Worksheet 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles 0 a Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 Number of major street through lanes: 1 Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation Critical Gap Calculation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c, base) t(c,hv) 1.00 P(hv) t(c,g) Grade/100 t(3,It) t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 2 -stage 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 Follow -Up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(f,base) 2.20 3.50 4.00 3.30 t(f,HV) 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 P(HV) 0 0 0 0 t(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signal Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) V prog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P g(gl) g(42) g(g) Computation 2 -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) beta Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 Computation 3 -Platoon Event Periods Result P(Z) p(5) 0.000 p(dom) - p(subo) Constrained or unconstrained? for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process ■ movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II P(1) 4 'P(7) p(8) P(9) POO) 'p(11) P(12) computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R r'V C,X Ulu 77o 170 vav s PX V c,u,x 'C r,x c plat,x Two -Stage Process 7 8 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 i Iva(c,x) 1700 1700 jP(X) V(c,u,x) C(r,x) C(plat,x) L ('Worksheet 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations Sten 1: RT from Minor St. 9 12 i:onzii��i�I ri.,..= ( Potential Capacity 494 i Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 1 Movement Capacity 494 'Probability of Queue free St. - 0.96 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 I conrliczing riuwn Potential Capacity 970 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Movement Capacity 970 'Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.99 Step : TH from Minor St. 8 11 M fConf icting F ows 99b Potential Capacity 246 L Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity 245 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Pedestrian Impedance Factor l.Uu i.Uu 'Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.99 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 Muvement Capacity 272 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Probability of Queue free St. Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 998 Potential Capacity 246 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.99 0.99 Movement Capacity 245 Result for 2 stage process: a y C t 245 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. 7 10 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity . Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 998 Potential Capacity 273 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.99 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 1.00 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 1.00 0.96 Movement Capacity 272 Results for Two-stage process: y C t 272 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane Calculations Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R— volume (vpn) 14 U zu Movement Capacity (vph) 272 245 494 ' Worksheet 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' C eep 272 245 494 Volume Delay Q sep Q eep +1 round (Qsep +1) ;I n max C sh SUM C sep n C act I 12 0 20 378 heet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service !MMovement 1 4 7 8 L Lane Config LT LTR 'v (vph) 4 32 C(m) (vph) 970 378 v/c 0.00 0.08 95i queue length Control Delay 0.01 8.7 0.28 15.4 ( LOS A C ! Approach Delay 15.4 _ Annroach LOS C Worksheet 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay I P(o)) v(il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 'v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 ( s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 I s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 p*(oj) 'd(M,LT), Delay for stream 1 or 4 N, Number of major street through lanes d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 374- 0 1700 1700 0.99 8.7 1 0.0 0 HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL SUMMARY Analyst: HEW Agency/Co.: Farleigh Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PM peak, project complete 'Intersection: tee Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Project North/South Street: Alii Dr a Intersection Orientation: NS Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments Major Street: Approach Northbound Southbound Movement 1 2 3 14 5 6 L T R L T R volume 514 20 19 510 Peak -Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 514 20 19 510 Percent Heavy Vehicles -- -- 0 -- -- Median Type Undivided v/c 0.02 0 0 RT Channelized? 0.19 Control Delay 8.5 16.1 Lanes 1 0 C No 0 1 Configuration TR C LT Upstream Signal? No - No Minor Street: Approach Westbound 0 Eastbound Movement 7 8 9 30 11 12 L T R L T R volume SB 10 0 11 Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 Hourly Flow Rate, HFR 10 0 11 Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade (%) v/c 0.02 0 0 Median Storage 0.19 Control Delay 8.5 16.1 Flared Approach: Exists? C No 16.1 Storage C RT Channelized? Lanes 0 1 0 _. Configuration LTR Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Approach NB SB Westbound Eastbound Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 Lane Config LT LTR v (vph) 19 21 C(m) (vph) 1044 344 v/c 0.02 0.06 958 queue length 0.06 0.19 Control Delay 8.5 16.1 LOS A C Approach Delay 16.1 Approach LOS C HCS2000: Unsignalized Intersections Release 4.1 Bruce E. Witcher, P.E. Witcher Engineering LLP 74-5588 C Pawai Place Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 0 E-Mail: bewitch@ilhawaii.net - TWO-WAY STOP CONTROL(TWSC) ANALYSIS .Analyst: HEW 'Agency/Co.: Farleigh " Date Performed: 08/22/2003 Analysis Time Period: PM peak, project Intersection: tee 'Jurisdiction: Hawaii Co Analysis Year: 2003 Project ID: 435-OIT-03 East/West Street: Project 'North/South Street: Alii Dr Intersection orientation: NS complete Study period (hrs): 1.00 Vehicle Volumes and Adjustments major Street Movements 1 2 3 4 5 6 L T R L T R Peak -Hour Factor, PHF Peak -15 Minute Volume Hourly Flow Rate, HFR Percent Heavy Vehicles ..'Median Type Undivided RT Channelized? Lanes Configuration Upstream Signal? L 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 128 5 5 128 514 20 19 510 1 0 TR No 8 T 'Peak Hour Factor, PHF 0 1 1.00 - Peak -15 Minute Volume LT 0 3 Flow Rate, HFR 10 No 11 'Hourly Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 V-1 0 11 12 R L T R 'Peak Hour Factor, PHF 1.00 1.00 1.00 - Peak -15 Minute Volume 2 0 3 Flow Rate, HFR 10 0 11 'Hourly Percent Heavy Vehicles 0 0 0 Percent Grade ($) 0 •-Median Storage Approach: Exists? No ,'Flared Storage RT Channelized? -Lanes 0 1 0 WConfiguration LTR C ian Volumes and Adjustments 13 14 15- 1,6 mr-iow (peu/nr) - - - - Lane Width (ft) 12.0 12.0 12.0 12.0 Walking Speed (ft/sec) 4.0 4.0 4.0 4.0 'Percent Blockage 0 0 0 0 Upstream Signal Data Prog. Sat Arrival Green Cycle Prog. Distance Flow Flow Type Time Length Speed to Signal vph vph sec sec mph feet Through S5 Left -Turn -- Through 3 -Data for Computing Effect of Delay to Major Street Vehicles 0 a Shared In volume, major rt vehicles: 0 Sat flow rate, major th vehicles: 1700 Sat flow rate, major rt vehicles: 1700 Number of major street through lanes: I Worksheet 4 -Critical Gap and Follow-up Time Calculation critical Gap Ca culation Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R t(c, ase) t(c,hv) 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 P(hv) 0 0 0 0 t(c,g) 0.20 0.20 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.10 Grade/100 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 t(3,lt) 0.00 0.70 0.00 0.00 t(c,T): 1 -stage 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2 -stage 0.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 1.00 1.00 0.00 t(c) 1 -stage 4.1 6.4 6.5 6.2 2 -stage Follow-up Time Calculations Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 0.90 , t(fHV) -P(HV) 0 0 0 0 t(f) 2.2 3.5 4.0 3.3 Worksheet 5 -Effect of Upstream Signals Computation 1 -Queue Clearance Time at Upstream Signa Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) V prog Total Saturation Flow Rate, s (vph) Arrival Type Effective Green, g (sec) Cycle Length, C (sec) Rp (from table 9-2) Proportion vehicles arriving on green P 9(41) g(42) g(4) Computation -Proportion of TWSC Intersection Time, blocked Movement 2 Movement 5 V(t) V(l,prot) V(t) V(l,prot) Travel time, t(a) (sec) Smoothing Factor, F Proportion of conflicting flow, f Max platooned flow, V(c,max) Min platooned flow, V(c,min) Duration of blocked period, t(p) Proportion time blocked, p 0.000 0.000 Computation 3 -Platoon Event Periods Result P15) 0.000 p(dom) p(subo) Constrained or unconstrained? for minor Single -stage Two -Stage Process movements, p(x) Process Stage I Stage II P(l) P(4) JP(7) P(e) P(9) 'P(1o) p(12) Computation 4 and 5 Single -Stage Process Movement 1 4 7 8 9 10 11 12 L L L T R L T R r,x plat,x Two -Stage Process 7 e 10 11 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 Stagel Stage2 V(c, x) e 1700 1700 P(x) V(C,u,X) ,c(r,x) j C(plat,x) r L 6 -Impedance and Capacity Equations step a: Conflicting Flows "I Potential Capacity 557 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 - Movement Capacity 557 Probability of Queue free St. 0.98 1.00 Step 2: LT from Major St. 4 1 jtconriicting eiowy Potential Capacity 1044 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 - Movement Capacity 1044 'Probability of Queue free St. 0.98 1.00 Maj L -Shared Prob Q free St. 0.97 Step : TH from Minor St. 8 11 JConflicting Flows 1072 Potential capacity 222 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 _ Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 - 0.97 Movement Capacity 216 �' Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Manor St. 7_1 0 ' 'gCon acting F ows lu7[- Potential Capacity 246 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 'Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 Movement Capacity 242 Worksheet 7 -Computation of the Effect of Two-stage Gap Acceptance Step 3: TH from Minor St. 8 11 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Probability of Queue free St. 1072 Part 2 - Second Stage Potential Capacity 246 Conflicting Flows Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 Potential Capacity Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.98 Movement Capacity Movement Capacity 242 Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 1072 Potential Capacity 222 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.97 0.97 Movement Capacity 216 Result for 2 stage process: y 2 C t 16 Probability of Queue free St. 1.00 1.00 Step 4: LT from Minor St. .7 10 Part 1 - First Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 2 - Second Stage Conflicting Flows Potential Capacity Pedestrian Impedance Factor Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt Movement Capacity Part 3 - Single Stage Conflicting Flows 1072 Potential Capacity 246 Pedestrian Impedance Factor 1.00 1.00 Maj. L, Min T Impedance factor 0.97 Maj. L, Min T Adj. Imp Factor. 0.98 Cap. Adj. factor due to Impeding mvmnt 0.98 0.96 Movement Capacity 242 Results for Two-stage process: y 2 C t 42 Worksheet 8 -Shared Lane calculations Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R - L T 8_ Volume (vph) 10 0 11 Movement Capacity (vph) 242 216 557 I IWorksheet Movement 7 8 9 10 11 12 L T R L T R ' C sep 242 216 557 volume 10 0 11 Delay Q 8ep Q Sep +1 round (Qsep +1) E 0 9 -Computation of Effect of Flared Minor Street Approaches n max C sh 344 SUM C sep 'n C act Worksheet 10 -Delay, Queue Length, and Level of Service Lane Config LT LTR (vph) 19 21 C(m) (vph) ,'v 1044 344 vac 0.02 0.06 95%. queue length 0.06 0.19 8.5 16.1 i1Control-Delay LOS A C Approach Delay 16.1 Approach LOS C 11 -Shared Major LT Impedance and Delay Movement 2 Movement 5 0 1.00 0.98 v( 3) - il), Volume for stream 2 or 5 510 v(i2), Volume for stream 3 or 6 0 r' s(il), Saturation flow rate for stream 2 or 5 1700 s(i2), Saturation flow rate for stream 3 or 6 1700 p"(oj) 0.97 d(M41,T), Delay for stream 1 or 4 8.5 -'N, Number of major street through lanes 1 d(rank,l) Delay for stream 2 or 5 0.2 J 0 0 APPENDIX F TRAFFIC MOVEMENT DIAGRAMS ALII DRIVE & ROYAL POINCIANA STREET Alii Drive - Royal Poinciana Street Traffic Movement - Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour 490 270 331 111 220 1N 435-OIT-03 8/18/03 188 111 77 77 (347 270 104 324 220 WITCHER ENGINEERING LL Keilue Konek HnwHwy,, YBe<0106 C.� 1a., Ci.il E.4i.wn 'BOB' 334-0322 C..rtrwai. Moyan Alii Drive - Royal Poinciana Street Traffic Movement - Existing Conditions PM Peak Hour 454 372 104 360 JN 435-01T-03 8/18/03 185 104 8 453 72 117 477 360 a Y w Y Q J Q w Y -A WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP -sass Eu ,n. Hry sie. ,o9 C .... Ili., Ci.il E.yi.— RnJue-Kona H...n 96149 1809, 33<-0322 _� Q.4rv[(i.e %gym. [... I Alii Drive - Royal Poinciana Street Traffic Movement - Future Conditions AM Peak Hour a 497 o (274 Y Q a 115 Y 343 228 JN 435-O1T-03 8/18/03 327 '3 104 192 115 7 A 351 Q ?74 Y w X Q 104 w 332 Y 228 WITCHER ENGINEERING LLI 75-5751 Kuakmi Hwy Ste 106 C.. Ik:y Ci.a Egia»w Kaaue-Kona. B.,i 66740 (BOB) 339-0322 K'� Alii Drive - Royal Poinciana Street Traffic Movement - Future Conditions PM Peak Hour 187 106 E 474 388 474 106 368 JN 435 -DIT -03 8/18/03 469 388 117 485 368 'vk WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP 75-5751 Au.kmi HvV.. Ste 105 Ca Jfi.( Ci.il Egi...n 1,1v.-K.n.. x....11 9B04o —� M...r.. 18081334-0322 1 I 1 �1 1 TRAFFIC MOVEMENT DIAGRAMS ALU DRIVE & LUNAPULE ROAD Alii Drive - Lunapule Street Traffic Movement - Existing Conditions AM Peak Hour �I li i 115 147 18 97 3 144 J 18 144 Q 502 628 Q 0 )484 484 w Q Q a 3 97 w Y 295 389 Y 292 292 WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP SN 435-01T-03 ]5595] Kuekini x. Ste 106 8/18/03 Keil ue-Kone. Hewefi90740 �� Cu �4q :,,il Egi.wn <B0B1 334-0322 Cw6vdiw tt,.. Alii Drive - Lunapule Traffic Movement - Existing PM Peak Hour 99 19 8 A i 527 503 .•N 19 479 JN 435-O1T-03 8/18/03 Street Conditions 583 503 132 479 611 WITCHER ENGINEERING LLF 4V& 05-5951 Ku -kin] Hwy Ste 106 G. 16.E CiA E..;.»n Keilue-Kan e. New eii 96040 IB061334-0322 Alii Drive - Lunapule Street Traffic Movement - Future Conditions AM Peak Hour Q 517 o (499 Y a a 3 Y 298 295 JN 435-O1T-03 8/18/03 648 99 98 393 295 Q Y W Y a J Q w Y 'Nk WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP 75- 5751 nuexini Hwy Ste 106 K,J.. Hone. Hvv eJ 96140 18001334-0322 z z 0 Y Q J a Y Alii Drive - Lunapule Street Traffic Movement - Future Conditions PM Peak Hour 536 512 513 19 494 JN 435-01T-03 B/18/03 101 19 82 1, II 82 (594 512 136 630 494 -A WITCHER ENGINEERING LLF 75-5/51 6uek)ni Nwy., Sle ]O6 n.ilu,K.... H.w.11 asv.o (`�fi.� Qidl E.si.—n C..a...6.. M...�.., (808) 394-0322 r APPENDIX H w TRAFFIC MOVEMENT DIAGRAMS AT DEVELOPMENT ENTRANCE Alii Drive - Project Site Traffic Movement - At Build Out PM Peak Hour \i 21 Z� 1 10 Q 525 o Y 514 Q J Q 19 Y 529 { (� 510 JN 435-01T-03 8/18/03 39 19 Gv � 534 a 514 ) Y W Y Q J 10 w 520 Y 510 WITCHER ENGINEERING LLP 95-5951 Nuekmi Hay Ste 108 Coe W., Cidl E.6.—.18W 33Kone. R. '6" 88960 CeeAeeNio M.ee Kee, o 23400322 _� {e^ § 25-5-166 Section 25-5-166. Minimum yards. HAwAii COUNTY CODs 'There shall be no minimum yards in the O district, except as specified as a condition of approval attached to any plan approval. For this purpose, the minimum yard regulations in the adjoining districts shall be used as guides. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-5-167. Other regulations. Plan approval shall be required for all new structures and additions to existing structures in the O district. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Article 6. Optional Development Regulations. Division 1. Planned Unit Development (P.U.D.). Section 25-6-1. Purpose. The purpose of planned unit development (P.U.D.) is to encourage comprehensive site planning that adapts the design of development to the land, by allowing diversification in the relationships of various uses, buildings, structures, open spaces and yards, building heights, and lot sizes in planned building groups, while still insuring that the intent of this chapter is observed (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-2. Minimum land area required. The minimum land area required for a P.U.D. shall be two acres. (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-3. Application for P.U.D. permit; requirements. An application for a P.U.D. permit shall be on a form prescribed for this purpose by the director and shall be accompanied by: (1) A filing fee of $500. (2) A written description of the proposed project, including the following information: (A) A description of the property in sufficient detail to determine the precise location of the property involved; (B) A statement of objectives and reasons for the requested P.U.D. permit, including an analysis of how the request satisfies the standards contained in section 25-6-10; (C) A list of all requested deviations or variances from the requirements of chapter 23 (subdivisions) and chapter 25 (zoning) of the County Code; (D) A schedule for the timetable of the proposed development; and (E) An analysis of the relationship of the proposed development to the general plan. (3) Drawings and plans comprising a general development plan covering the entire area of the P.U.D., and providing the following information: (A) Uses, dimensions, and locations of proposed structures; (B) Widths, alignments, and improvements of proposed streets and pedestrian and drainage ways; (C) Any proposed subdivision of property for individual parcel sale; (D) Parking areas; (E) Public areas and uses; and (F) Landscaping and open spaces. (4) Architectural drawings for all buildings other than single-family dwellings demonstrating the design and character of the proposed buildings and uses. EXHIBIT (Hawaii Cosy 7.1-00) 25-92 _ V ZONING § 25-6-3 (5) A list of the names, addresses and tax map key numbers of all surrounding owners and lessees of property interests in property within the boundaries established by section 25-2-4. (6) Any other information or plans required by rules adopted by the director in accordance with chapter 91, Hawaii'Pevised Statutes. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-4. Notice of action on P.U.D. application. (a) Upon acceptance of a P.U.D. application, the director shall fix a date for the d'irector's action on the application. Within ten days after receiving notice of such date, the applicant shall serve notice of the application on surrounding owners and lessees of record, as provided by section 25-2.4. The applicant shall also serve notice on owners and lessees of record of interests in other properties which the director may find to be directly affected by the P.U.D. permit sought. (b) The director shall publish notice of the date of the proposed decision by the director and the date by which written comments must be received by the director in at least two newspapers of general circulation in the County, at least ten days prior to the director's proposed decision. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-5. Procedure for processing application when use not permitted in districL An application for a P.U.D. permit that proposes a use not permitted either directly or as a conditional use within a district may be considered by the director only if a separate application for a change of zone is filed concurrently with or prior to the P.U.D. permit application. The P.U.D. permit application and the change of zone application shall be considered concurrently, and any P.U.D. approved by the director shall be effective only when the change of zone ordinance becomes effective. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-6. Actions by director on P.U.D. permit applications. (a) Except as provided in section 25-6-5, the director shall, within sixty days after acceptance of a P.U.D. permit application, deny the application or approve it subject to conditions. (b) The conditions imposed by the director shall bear a reasonable relationship to the P.U.D. permit issued, and to the approved uses, plans, and variances of district standards; provided, however, that no improvements or alterations off-site of the project shall be required as a condition of a P.U.D. permit The conditions may include, but not be limited to the following: (1) Commencement and completion time frame for the project; (2) Boundary and density changes approved in the project; (3) Uses that are prohibited or limited; (4) Specifications for the minimum development standards; (5) Specifications for street improvement and dedication; (6) Utilities to be furnished; and (7) The extent and limitations upon the variances permitted. (c) The director may, within the sixty-day period after acceptance of a P.U.D. permit application, grant a partial approval of the request where all plans and drawings have not been submitted with the original application. Provided, however, that no building permit shall be issued, nor shall any construction on the property commence until the drawings have been reviewed and approved by the director and full P.U.D. permit approval has been issued for the portion of development comprising the proposed construction. (d) When plans and drawings are submitted after a partial approval of a P.U.D. permit application has been issued under subsection (c) above with a request for further partial approval or frill approval, the director shall review the drawings and shall either approve or deny the request within thirty days from the date that the drawings are filed by the applicant In the event of a denial of such request, the applicant may 25-93 _ (Hawaii Cam 7-1.00) § 25-6-6 HAWAII COUNTY CODE resubmit a revised request for further partial or full P.U.D. permit approval of the application and in accordance with this subsection. (e) If the director fails to act upon a P.U.D. permit application within the prescribed sixty-day period as required by subsection (a) above, the application shall be considered as having been denied and the director shall immediately inform the applicant of such denial. If the director fails to act upon filed plans and drawings within the thirty -day period required by subsection (d) above, the plans shall be considered as having been approved and a full P.U.D. permit issued. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified and amended April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-7. Reserved. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999; Am. 1999, Ord. No. 99-112, sec. 12.) Section 25-6-8. Reserved. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999; Am. 1999, Ord No. 99-112, sec. 14.) Section 25-6-9. Reserved. (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999; Am. 1999, Ord No. 99-112, sec. 15.) Section 25-6-10. Criteria for granting a P.U.D. permit. A P.U.D. permit may be granted by the director upon finding that: (a) The construction of the project can begin and be completed within a reasonable period of time from the date of full approval. (b) The proposed development substantially conforms to the general plan. (c) Any residential or agricultural development shall constitute an environment of sustained desirability and stability for the district that is in harmony with the character of the surrounding area, that results in an intensity of land use no higher than that otherwise specified for the district, and that maintains the standards of open space at least as high as that otherwise specified for the district in which the development occurs. (d) Any commercial development shall not create traffic congestion which exceeds that which would have been produced under conventional development patterns, practices and standards in the district or interfere with any projected public improvements, shall provide for proper entrances and exits along with proper provisions for internal traffic and parking, and be an attractive center which does not adversely impact upon adjacent and surrounding existing or prospective developments. (e) Any industrial development shall be in conformity with desirable performance standards and shall constitute an efficient and well organized development with adequate provisions for freight service and necessary storage, and shall not adversely impact upon adjacent and surrounding existing or prospective development. (f) The development of a harmonious, integrated whole justifies exceptions, if required, to the normal requirements of this chapter, and the contemplated arrangements or use make it desirable to apply regulations and requirements differing from those ordinarily applicable under the district regulations. (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-11. Height exceptions authorized. (a) A building approved under a P.U.D. permit may exceed the height limit specified under the zoning district of the property and the height limits under section 25-4-22; provided, that the maximum height of the building shall not exceed seventy-five feet. (b) A building approved under a P.U.D. permit and situated within a zoning district which exceeds the height limits specified under subsection (a) may be permitted at the higher height limits prescribed for that zoning district. (nawaii county 7.1-00) 25-94 ZONING (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) § 25-6-11 Section 25-6.12. Approval of variances, use permits and plan approvals issued under P.U.D. permit. (a) No separate or additional variance permit or use permit shall be required for any variance or use approved under a P.U.D. permit, and any variance or use approved under a P.U.D. permit shall be considered to be in compliance with the required procedures for obtaining a variance or use permit. (b) Plan approval shall be considered issued when completed drawings are approved under a P.U.D. permit, and no further action is required for the issuance of plan approval under this chapter. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-13. Effect of P.U.D. permit on other zoning provisions. Any P.U.D. permit issued shall be subject to all of the conditions imposed in the permit and shall be exempted from other provisions of this chapter only to the extent specified in the permit (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-14. Time extensions and amendments. (a) Any request for a time extension or an amendment to a P.U.D. permit or to the conditions of a P.U.D. permit may be granted by the director upon finding that no change has occurred in relation to the property since the P.U.D. permit was issued or that the approval is still valid with respect to any changed conditions. (b) The director shall act on any request for a time extension or amendment within forty-five days after the receipt of the request In granting any time extension or amendment, the director may impose additional conditions to meet the intent of the P.U.D. permit (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-15. Appeals. (a) If the director denies a P.U.D. permit, such decision is final except that, within thirty days after the date of the written decision, the applicant may appeal such action to the board of appeals, pursuant to the rules of practice and procedure of the board of appeals. (b) Any person aggrieved by the decision of the director in the issuance of a P.U.D. permit decision may appeal the director's action to the board of appeals, in accordance with this chapter, within thirty days after the date of the director's written decision. (1999, Ord No. 99-112, sec. 13.) Division 2. Cluster Plan Development (C.P.D.). Section 25-6-20. Purpose. The purpose of cluster plan development (C.P.D.) is to provide exceptions to the density requirements of the single-family residential (RS) district so that permitted density of dwelling units contemplated by the minimum building site requirements is maintained on an overall basis and desirable open space, tree cover, recreational areas, or scenic vistas are preserved (1996, Ord No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) Section 25-6-21. Minimum land area required. The minimum land area required for a C.P.D. shall be two acres. (1996, Ord. No. 96-160, sec. 2; ratified April 6, 1999.) 25-95 _ (Rma Coomy 7-1-00) DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE: October 28, 2003 TO Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director Planning Department FROM Galen M. Kuba, Division Chief Engineering Division SUBJECT Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025 ) SMA Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015 ) Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC Location: Puapua'a 2nd, N. Kona, HI TMK: 3 / 7-5-020:071 and 072 We reviewed the subject application and our comments are as follows: DRAINAGE All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. 2. 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. 3. A drainage study shall be submitted prior to issuance of a grading permit, and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of DPW. Although the property is not located in a designated special Flood Hazard Area on the Flood Insurance Rate Maps, the applicant is advised of existing drainage reports on file with DPW for the area and shall identify and address offsite flows through the subject property as required by the Subdivision Code and the Storm Drainage Standard in a manner meeting with the approval of the DPW. The study shall address the proposed culverts on the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Alii Highway) Phase 1 plans, the existing drainage easement on the subject property and a concrete box culvert in Alii Drive fronting the subject property. EARTHWORK All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code. EXHIBIT C DPW to Planning Director REZ 03-025 Lehua Lani, LLC October 28, 2003 p.2of2 2. The applicant shall comply with chapter 11-55, Water Pollution Control, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Department of Health, which requires an NPDES permit for certain construction activity. ROADWAYS The eastern boundary of the subject property is or will be the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Alii Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way. Acquisition of the right-of-way has not been completed as of the date of this memorandum. The subject property owner shall be required to provide any additional right-of-way, at no cost to the County, as established by and upon completion of the final right-of-way maps by our consultant. 2. Access to Alii Drive, including the provision of adequate sight distances shall be limited to one approach, located to avoid turning conflicts with existing developments, meeting with the approval of DPW. The applicant shall provide a minimum of 45 feet of vehicle storage and a turnaround on the Alii Drive side of any gated vehicle access. All driveway connections to a County road shall conform to Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, of the Hawaii County Code. 3. Vehicular access to the individual lots shall not be from any major collector or arterial roadways. An emergency vehicular egress, with a breakaway gate, may be provided to Alii Highway, meeting with the approval of the DPW. 4. Alii Drive, fronting the subject property, is a County road. It has an approximate 20 -ft. wide pavement in good condition, with 6 -ft. wide paved shoulders all within an approximate 50 -ft. right-of-way. Alii Drive, shall be improved to a 60 -ft. right-of- way according to the County's General Plan. Accordingly, the applicant shall dedicate one-half the difference between the existing width of Alii Drive and 60 feet to the County as a condition of final subdivision approval or issuance of a certificate of occupancy. (SEE TRAFFIC) To serve the subject property and intermediate properties, the applicant shall extend the existing two-way left turn lane improvements, along the Alii Drive frontage of the subject property, consisting of, but not limited to, pavement widening, drainage improvements, street lights, signs and markings and any relocation of utilities; meeting with the approval of the DPW. The applicant shall construct and dedicate all improvements at no cost to the County. 5. All roadways within the proposed development shall follow the guidelines incorporated in the Hawaii Statewide Uniform Design Manual for Streets and Highways. These roadways shall also meet the requirements of DPW. Concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks should be required in areas of pedestrian traffic. DPW to Planning Director REZ 03-025 Lehua Lani, LLC October 28, 2003 p. 3 of 2 6. In the interests of pedestrian and bicyclist safety, the applicant shall provide a paved shoulder extending to the right-of-way property line. Pavement transitions, signs and markings, drainage improvements, and relocation of utilities may be required. Utility meter and pressure reducing valve vaults shall be located in easements out of the right-of-way. TRAFFIC We reviewed the TZAR, dated July 9, 2003. According the report, a left turn lane is not warranted based on level of service criteria for an intersection. However, traffic in the southbound lane will experience some delay when left turns are made to the project during peak hours. We can expect additional delays caused by pedestrian traffic where, as on Alii Drive, pedestrians and vehicular traffic share the road. In addition, no increase in traffic volumes on Alii Drive over the build -out period is accounted for in the report. If the existing turn lane is extended, it will serve intermediate properties as well. We recommend that the existing two-way left turn lane fronting the adjacent property to the north be extended to serve the entry to the subject project. The entry to the proposed project shall be located to avoid turning conflicts with existing developments. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Kiran Emler of our Kona Engineering Division office at 327-3530. KE copy "NG-HILO/KONA PLNG-KONA Harry Kim Mayor Barbara Bell Director 2,103 PrT 6 Pn 2 32 Cnuutu of �ttiutzii Pi,,., ,. L� RTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 25 Aupuni Street, Room 208 a Hilo, Hawaii 967204252 (808) 961-8083 • Fax (808) 961-8086 MEMORANDUM Date October 2, 2003 To . CHRISTOPHER YUEN, Planning Director From : XARBARA BELL, Director--� SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) �- Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots and Dwelling Units And Related Improvements Applicant: Lehua Lam, LLC TMK: 7-5-20:71 & 72 We have reviewed the subject application and offer the following recommendations: DEPARTMENT COMMENTS: WASTEWATER DIVISION: rw ( v� No comments ( ) Require connection of existing and/or proposed structures to the public sewer in accordance with Section 21-5 of the Hawaii County Code. ( ) Require extension of the sewer system to service the proposed subdivision in accordance with Section 23-85 of the Hawaii County Code. ) Other: SOLID WASTE DIVISION: ( X No 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. ( ) Other: EXHIB cc: SWD, WWD 3933 D 0414- bl" Harry Kim Mayor I_ =; County of Hawaii POLICE DEPARTMENT j 349 Kapiolmi Street • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3998 (808)935-3311 • Fax(808)961-2389 October 20, 2003 TO : CHRI HER J. N, NIG DIRECTOR FROM MAS HICC , �OLICE CHIEF, AREA II OPERA ONS Lawrence K. Mahuna Police Chief Harry S. Kubojiri Deputy Police Chief SUBJECT Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots and Dwelling Units and Improvements Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Staff has reviewed the above -referenced applications and has the following concern. Staff was concerned with the report stating that a left-hand turn lane from Alii Drive to the project site is not needed. As with all new requests for rezoning along Alii Drive for multi -unit subdivisions, we are requesting left -turn storage lanes. Should you have any comments or questions, please feel free to contact our Kona District Commander Captain John Dawrs at Phone No. 326-4211. EXHIBIT E -10 .. f .t C, Harry Kim Alayor Countp of'abiail FIRE DEPARTMENT =-u:a 25 Aupuni Street • Suite 103 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808)961-8297 • Fax (808) 961-8296 October 15, 2003 TO : CHRISTOPHER J. YUEN, PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM : DARRYL OLIVEIRA, FIRE CHIEF Darryl J. Oliveira Fire Chief Desmond K. Wery Deputy Fire Chief SUBJECT: CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-025) REQUEST: A -5a TO RS -7.15 SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (SMA 03-015) REQUEST: DEVELOPMENT OF 58 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS AND DWELLING UNITS AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS APPLICANT: LEHUA LANI, LLC TAX MAP KEY: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Fire apparatus access roads shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.207: "Fire Apparatus Access Roads "Sec. 10.207. (a) General. Fire apparatus access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with the provisions of this section. "(b) Where Required. Fire apparatus access roads shall be required for every building hereafter constructed when any portion of an exterior wall of the first story is located more than 150 feet from fire department vehicle access as measured by an unobstructed route around the exterior of the building. "EXCEPTIONS: 1. When buildings are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system, the provisions of this section may be modified. "2. When access roadways cannot be installed due to topography, waterways, nonnegotiable grades or other similar conditions, the chief may require additional fire protection as specified in Section 10.301 (b). 'XHIBIT 000 Christopher J. Yuen Page 2 October 15, 2003 "3. When there are not more than two Group R, Division 3 or Group M Occupancies, the requirements of this section may be modified, provided, in the opinion of the chief, fire -fighting or rescue operations would not be impaired. "More than one fire apparatus road may be required when it is determined by the chief that access by a single road may be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions or other factors that could limit access. "For high -piled combustible storage, see Section 81.109. "(c) Width. The unobstructed width of a fire apparatus access road shall meet the requirements of the appropriate county jurisdiction. "(d) Vertical Clearance. Fire apparatus access roads shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less than 13 feet 6 inches. "EXCEPTION: Upon approval vertical clearance may be reduced, provided such reduction does not impair access by fire apparatus and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating the established vertical clearance. "(e) Permissible Modifications. Vertical clearances or widths required by this section may be increased when, in the opinion of the chief, vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to provide fire apparatus access. "(f) Surface. Fire apparatus access roads shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads of fire apparatus and shall be provided with a surface so as to provide all-weather driving capabilities." (20 tons) "(g) Turning Radius. The turning radius of a fire apparatus access road shall be as approved by the chief." (45 feet) "(h) Turnarounds. All dead-end fire apparatus access roads in excess of 150 feet in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the turning around of fire apparatus. "(i) Bridges. When a bridge is required to be used as access under this section, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with the applicable sections of the Building Code and using designed live loading sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. Christopher J. Yuen Page 3 October 15, 2003 "Q) Grade. The gradient for a fire apparatus access road shall not exceed the maximum approved by the chief." (15%) "(k) Obstruction. The required width of any fire apparatus access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including parking of vehicles. Minimum required widths and clearances established under this section shall be maintained at all times. "(1) Signs. When required by the fire chief, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided and maintained for Fre apparatus access roads to identify such roads and prohibit the obstruction thereof or both" Water supply shall be in accordance with UFC Section 10.301: "(c) Water Supply. An approved water supply capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed, in accordance with the respective county water requirements. There shall be provided, when required by the chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. "Water supply may consist of reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, water mains or other fixed systems capable of providing the required fire flow. "The location, number and type of fire hydrants connected to a water supply capable of delivering the required fire flow shall be protected as set forth by the respective county water requirements. All hydrants shall be accessible to the fire department apparatus by roadways meeting the requirements of Section 10.207." kARL OLIVEIRA Fire Chief RK:lk 33 err p Harry, Qm Mayor- - a;: October 22, 2003 Countp of �abiaC i DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 • Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 (808) 961-8311 • Fax (808) 961-8411 Christopher J. Yuen, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Subject: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) Request: A -5a to RS -7.5 Patricia G. Engelhard Director Pamela N. Mizuno Deputy Director Special Management Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots/Dwelling Units in a Planned Unit Development (PUD) w/related improvements Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC TMK: 7-5-20:071 & 072 Dear Mr. Yuen: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject Change of Zone Application and Special Management Use Permit Application with the attached Planning and Environmental Report. The aforementioned report states that "the proposed improvements should not have any adverse impact to the recreational resources of the area". However, it is our contention that the South Kona district is currently under -served by existing active public recreational facilities and amenities. Any increase in available dwelling units without a corresponding increase in active recreational amenities should be considered an adverse impact. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) does propose to set aside common areas for a passive park site and for conservation of an existing historic burial site. We concur that both will be valuable assets to the residents of the PUD. However, these sites are not sufficient to service the active recreational needs of the PUD's residents who will be forced to seek active recreation opportunities primarily at nearby public facilities. EXHIBIT - G lk4.1 Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) (SMA 03-015) October 22, 2003 Lehua Lani, LLC (TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72) Page 2 Accordingly, we ask that the appropriate Fair Share Contributions be assessed the applicant in conjunction with the proposed actions. Furthermore, we request that appropriate measures be taken to ensure that the proposed passive park sites be preserved and cared for in perpetuity as such by the applicant. In conclusion, and for the record, we would like to state that it is the position of the Department of Parks and Recreation that we have no interest in assuming any responsibility, at any capacity, for the subject "park" sites. Please contact our staff planner, James Komata at 961-8531 should you have any questions or wish to discuss any of the issues presented herein. Re ectfully, �atrici G. Engelhard Director Harry Kim Mayor CnnUUfLT of 'eitxfunii CIVIL DEFENSE AGENCY 920 Ululani Street . Hilo, Hawai'i 96720-3958 (808) 935-0031 • Fax(808)935-6460 TO: Christopher J. Yuen, Director, Planning Department FROM: Troy M. Kindred, Administrator DATE: October 7, 2003 SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025), Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Troy M. Kindred Administrator Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots and Dwelling Units and Related Improvements Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 & 72 The hazards are adequately described by this plan, however the following issues are addressed below: • The proposed site is located beyond the acceptable range of the nearest Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren. Recommend developer purchase and install an approved Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren. I have reservations with the applicant's assessment on "Traffic Impact Analysis, (Study by Witcher Engineering LLP)," that an additional 58 -single family home sub -division, will have no adverse impact on traffic congestion. Any additional development along Ali'i Drive without a corresponding "Mauka-Makai" access route will have an adverse effect on traffic in the event of an emergency evacuation for the tsunami evacuation zone. EXHIBIT H Harry Kim Mayor October 2, 2003 MEMORANDUM �ottn�r�€ pati OFFICE OF HOUSING AND 3 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT; 50 Wailuku DriW,' 7Ilo, Hawaii 96720-2484. ' . . VlI7 (BOB) 961-8379 : FAX (808) 961-8685 TO: Christopher J. Yuen, Director Planning Department FROM: Edwin S. Taira �\ Housing Administrator SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) Lehua Lani, LLC Tax Map: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Edwin S. Taira Housing Administrator Housing conditions, pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawai'i County Code, relating to Affordable Housing Policy, are applicable to the residential portions of this application. Thank you for the opportunity to comment. Please call us at ext. 8379 if you have any questions or need additional information. 4715dmko.doc EXHIBIT qa EQUAL HOUSING OPPORTUNITY 'AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER' LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR DATE: October 20, 2003 4� O♦ N1 4� ,Y'J• 7yy 5 a STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. BOX 916 HILO, HAWAII 96721-0916 TO: Christopher J. Yuen Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Aaron A. Ueno AM District Environmental Health Program Chief SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots and Dwelling Units and Related Improvements Applicant: Lehua Lani, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 & 72 CHIYOME L. FUKINO, M.D. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH The subject project is located within or near proximity to the County sewer system. Wastewater Branch supports the sewer requirements made by the County for the proposed project. The Army Corps of Engineers should be contacted at (808) 438-9258 to identify whether a Federal license or permit (including a Department of Army permit) is required for this project. Pursuant to Section 401(a)(1) of the Federal Water Pollution Act (commonly known as the "Clean Water Act'), a Section 401 Water Quality Certification is required for "[a]ny applicant for Federal license or permit to conduct any activity including, but not limited to, the construction or operation of facilities, which may result in any discharge into the navigable waters...." A National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) general permit coverage is required for the following activities: a. Storm water associated with industrial activities, as define in Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, Sections 122.26(b)(14)(i) through 122.26(b)(14)(ix) and 122.26(b)(14)(xi); EXHIBIT- S Planning Director, County of Hawaii October 20, 2003 Page 2 b. Construction activities, including clearing, grading, and excavations, that result in the disturbance of equal to or greater than one (1) acre of total land area. The total land area includes a contiguous area where multiple separate and distinct construction activities may be taking place at different times on different schedules under a larger common plan of development or sale. An NPDES permit is required before the commencement of the construction activities. C. Discharge of treated effluent from leaking underground storage tank remedial activities; d. Discharge of once through cooling water less than one (1) million gallons per day; C. Discharge of hydrotesting water; f. Discharge of construction dewatering effluent; g. Discharge of treated effluent from petroleum bulk stations and terminals; h. Discharge of treated effluent from well drilling activities; i. Discharge of treated effluent from recycled water distribution systems; j. Discharges of storm water from a small municipal separate storm sewer system; and k. Discharge of circulation water from decorative ponds or tanks. The Clean Water Branch (CWB) requires that a Notice of Intent (NOI) to be covered by a NPDES general permit for any of the above activities be submitted at least 30 days before the commencement of the respective activities. The NOI forms may be picked up at our office or downloaded from our website at httl2://www.state.hi.us/doh/eh/cwb/forms/2enl-index.html The applicant may be required to apply for an individual NPDES permit if there is any type of activity in which wastewater is discharged from the project into State waters and/or coverage of the discharge(s) under the NPDES general permit(s) is not permissible. An application for the NPDES permit is to be submitted at least 180 days before the commencement of the respective activities. The NPDES application forms may also be picked up at our office or downloaded from website at htty://www.state.hi.us/doh/eh/cwb/forms/indiv-index,html. Hawaii Administrative Rules, Section 11-55-38, also requires the owner to either submit a copy of the new NOI or NPDES permit application to the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) or demonstrate to the satisfaction of the DOH that the project, activity, or site covered by the NOI or application has been or is being reviewed by SHPD. Please submit a copy of the request for review by SHPD or SHPD's determination letter for the project. If you have any questions, please contact the CWB at 586-4309. Planning Director, County of Hawaii October 20, 2003 Page 3 Underground Injection Systems (Ph. 586-4258) which receive wastewater or storm run-offs from the proposed development need to address the requirements of Chapter 23, Hawaii State Department of Health Administrative Rules, Title 11, "Underground Injection Control." W ORD: REZ03-025 SMA03-015.my LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR DATE: October 22, 2003 STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. eox 916 HILO, HAWAII 96721-0916 TO: Christopher J. Yuen Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Aaron A. Ueno District Environmental Health Program Chief 017 zy pm, ;iw SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) Request: A -5a to RS -7.15 Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Request: Development of 58 Single Family Lots and Dwelling Units and Related Improvements Applicant: Lehua Lam, LLC Tax Map Key: 7-5-20:71 & 72 CHIVOME L. FLIKINO, M.D. DIRECTOR OF HEALTH x,n3 The subject project is located within or near proximity to the County sewer system. Wastewater Branch supports the sewer requirements made by the County for the proposed project. WORD:2REZ03-025.my LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR Mr. Christopher Yuen Director Planning Department County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 o Fw� RODNEY K. HARAGA w DIRECTOR ( - Deputy Prev., !' Bruce Y. Matsui STATE OF HAWAII•`�r 1. IN REPLY REFER TO DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION "T 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET S�P 8.0909 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 C, ' O October 8, 2003. I 01 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Lehua Lam LLC Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) TMK: (3) 7-5-20: 71 & 72 Thank you for requesting our review of the subject applications for this project of a 58 lot/dwelling planned unit development. The proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant impact on our State highway facilities. We appreciate the opportunity to provide our comments. Very truly yours, l� i 6D' E K. GA Direct of Transportation EXHIBIT `��xa ® 01- STATE LINDA LINGLE _X GWERNG'R OF HAWAH DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION PO. BOX 2360 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96804 OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT October 29, 2003 Mr, Christopher J. Yuen Planning Director County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3034 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Lehua Lani, LLC Applications Special Management Area Permit (SMA 03-015) and Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) North Kona Hawaii TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72 PATRICIA HAMAMOTO SUPERINTENDENT The Department of Education (DOE) has reviewed the applications for Lehua Lani, LLC (Applicant) a single-family subdivision, fronting Alii Drive between Kailua and Keauhou. The Applicant is proposing 58 lots and homes on a 10.1+ acre parcel 500 feet north and makai of Kahakai Elementary School. The DOE requests that the County of Hawaii include, as a condition of zoning, a school contribution using the standard fair -share language used in rezoning. The proposed wording is: The Applicant shall contribute to the development, funding, and/or construction of school facilities, on a fair -share basis, as determined by and to the satisfaction of the Department of Education. Terms of the contribution shall be agreed upon in writing by the Applicant and the Department of Education prior to obtaining building permits for any area of the project. The DOE would also like to request that special efforts be made to coordinate construction activity with the principal of Kahakai Elementary School so that construction -related dust and noise could be minimized during school hours. The principal should be fully informed in advance of inconveniences such as blasting, earth moving, street closures, traffic detours, and interruptions of utility services. _ EXHISIT L AN AFFIRMATIVE ACTION AND EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER Mr. Christopher J. Yuen Page 2 October 29, 2003 If you have any questions, please call Rae M. Loui, Assistant Superintendent of the Office of Business Services, at 586-3444 or Raynor M. Minami, Director of the Facilities and Support Services Branch, at 733-4860. Very truly yours, Patricia Hamamoto Superintendent PH:hy c: Rae M. Loui, OBS Raynor M. Minami, FSSB CAS/Kealakehe Complex Principal, Kahakai Elementary ONA TRAFFIC Ccuk"ITTEE 77-180 KEKAI PLACE z KAILUA-Ko NA z HAwAC1 96740 z 808-331-2765 z ktsc@hawaii.rr.com promoting a safe environment for all modes of land transportation in the districts of North and South Kona October 19, 2003 Chris Yuen, Director Hawaii County Department of Planning 25 Aupuni Street, Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Lehua Lani, LLC Applications for SMA and Rezoning Dear Mr. Yuen: Thank you for forwarding the subject applications to the Kona Traffic Safety Committee (KTSC) for review and comment. We greatly appreciate the opportunity to participate in the planning process and trust that our observations and suggestions regarding traffic issues will prove helpful to the Planning Department's and Commission's deliberations. Our examination of the applications discloses several traffic issues that should be carefully addressed and thoroughly questioned: project density; pedestrian safety; effect on Alii Drive and mauka-makai traffic; emergency and service vehicle access; and school transportation. Project Density Project density will, of course, affect traffic; the more homes, the more vehicles. The applicant proposes 58 home sites ranging from 4000 to 6000+ square feet per site. (Page 6). Multiplying 58 by an average of 5000 square feet per site results in a total unit area of 290,000 square feet, leaving approximately 150,000 square feet for streets and open space. The RS -7.5 zone, however, requires at least 7500 square feet for each unit. The KTSC sees no compelling reason for permitting greater density than that permitted by law. Indeed, the reduced setbacks planned by the developer for homes in the projected price range ($350,000 to $400,000) will probably have an adverse effect on sales. We urge that the Planning Commission require the developer to comply with the density permitted in the RS -7.5 zone while retaining the 150,000 square feet of open space, and to limit the number of units to 39 (290,000 divided by 7500). E X H I B I T M Pedestrian Safety The application states: "In addition to the grassed swales, there will be trees and flowering landscaping within the balance of the road rights-of-way. This will help create a friendly, pedestrian -oriented streetscape, where the roads and their rights-of-way would not be limited to vehicles. They would have multiple functions, serving also as jogging/walking paths, overflow parking, and a visual amenity." (Page 3). While the inclusion of grassed swales, trees and flowering shrubs within the road rights-of- way is commendable and desirable, the KTSC is concerned that the contemplated multiple functions, namely jogging/walking paths, vehicles and overflow parking, will compete and be unsafe. We therefore suggest that to create a "pedestrian -oriented streetscape," the developer be required to designate jogging/walking paths that are separate from overflow parking and vehicular traffic lanes. Effect on Alii Drive and Mauka-Makai Traffic The application cites a Traffic Impact Analysis (TIA) that concluded that the levels of service at the Alii Drive/Royal Poinciana and Alii Drive/Lunapule intersections "are not significantly impacted by this development," and that "a left turn lane from Alii Drive to the project was not needed." Our review of the TIA disclosed that it failed to adequately take into account the likelihood that additional development on presently vacant land in the area would contribute more traffic on Alii Drive and the two closest mauka-makai streets, which are a mile -and -a - half apart. Although some Alii Drive traffic may eventually be diverted to the proposed Alii Parkway, we don't anticipate its completion for some time. Moreover, access to the Parkway will be limited, so residents and visitors of Lehua Lani and other Alii Drive developments will still use Alii Drive. Please note: Within the last two years, four pedestrians and one cyclist have died in crashes with motor vehicles on Alii Drive. There have been at least one motorist death and innumerable crashes with injuries among all user groups in this same time. Furthermore, the TIA did not address the problem of emergency evacuation in case of tsunami that will be exacerbated by this development. At present, only two mauka-makai streets, one of which has been fitted with speed humps, are available to move evacuation traffic to safe ground. A third route, the Lako Street extension to Alii Drive, has been planned but its design and the timing of its completion remain uncertain, and its junction with Alii Drive will be located well south of Royal Poinciana. The RTSC therefore recommends that the county plan another mauka-makai connector along the sewer line road to Kahakai Estates that abuts the Alii Lani subdivision. A roundabout is planned for the Alii Parkway/Sewer Line Road junction, and our tax dollars should be spent on a traffic -calming feature that can maximize its use for the public good. We also recommend that area developers contribute to the cost of the needed mauka-makai connector road. Although the absence of a left -turn lane from Alii Drive into the property may not "appreciably improve" the flow of traffic on Alii Drive, it poses a safety concern because southbound drivers, moving at the posted speed (30 mph) or, as is often the case, somewhat faster, might not anticipate suddenly having to stop while vehicles in front of them wait to execute a left turn. Therefore, the KTSC strongly recommends that a left -turn lane from Alii Drive into the development be required. We are surprised that a project of this size without turn lanes would even be considered. Please note: The KTSC repeatedly hears from businesses, churches, private schools, and residents in neighborhoods without turn lanes, that turn lanes are needed. But when we investigate, we learn that "the County approved the plans." Emergency and Service Vehicle Access Although the proposed 20 foot -wide primary road pavement might satisfy legal requirements, the 18 foot pavement for the rear access lanes (Page 3) will not be adequate to handle large emergency and service vehicles such as fire trucks, ambulances, and garbage trucks. We therefore urge that the rear access lanes also have 20 -foot pavements. School Transportation The nature of the development and the size of its homes indicate that there will likely be many families with school-age children. Although the Kahakai Elementary School is only 500 feet southeast of the site (Page 1), it is 2/3 of a mile away when walking along streets, and the nearest public intermediate and high schools are many miles away. Accordingly, school bus transportation will be required. Students, however, will have to cross Alii Drive at least once a day to board or exit the bus, which can be hazardous. It may therefore be appropriate to require that the applicant fund installation of a direct pedestrian link between the development and Kahakai Elementary School and button -activated crosswalk lights for intermediate and high school students using the bus. We again thank you for the opportunity to comment, and will be pleased to orally summarize our concerns when the Planning Commission considers this proposal. Sincerely yours, Joel Gimpel, Chair Government Relations Kona Traffic Safety Committee t1aWa11 ciecuic Lrgni kc,npany, if IC. • r-, o,, • -ins r i i,�, October 17, 2003 Planning Department Attn: Mr. Christopher J. Yuen, Planning Director County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 Gentlemen: Subject: Lehua Lani Change Of Zone (REZ 03-025) 58 -Unit Single Family Residential Development TMK: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject plans. We do not have any objections to the subject application; however, have the following comments and requirements: Section VILD Utilities: HELCO's current system peak load is 177,900 KW and our total generation system capability is 233,700 KW. Our reserve margin is 31 % and has adequate generation to serve the project. The existing area is served from HELCO's Kailua 15 circuit and Kailua substation transformer #1. The existing substation transformer is close to 90% of the nameplate rating. HELCO is planning to install a new substation on the mauka corner of Palani Road and Henry Street to relief the Kailua transformer #1 loading and other nearby substations. 2. The project consultants and engineers are urged to contact HELCO's Engineering Department as soon as practicable to open a service request to insure timely procurement of long lead equipment. The service request include the calculation of the anticipated electrical demand and phasing schedule that are required to determine the final electrical requirements for this project. Distribution line easements will be required within the project location. We strongly recommend that energy efficient and conservation features suitable to reduce the peak electrical demand are part of the development's plans. We recommend that this development take full advantage of waste heat recovery equipment to recycle and reuse the waste heat rejected by air conditioning and refrigeration equipment. If this equipment is incorporated in the development's original design, the amount of energy required will be substantially reduced. EXHIN-T N Planning Department Page 2 October 17, 2003 A remote meter reading option is now available using the electrical lines as communication medium to a central master receiver at the substation. This option will require additional equipment in the HELCO meters and the substation. A cost estimate for this option may be requested from the Engineering Department. Should you have any questions, please contact me at (808) 969-0321 or Hal Kamigaki at (808) 969-0322. Sincerely, q4K U Clyde H. Nagat , P.E. Manager, Engineering Department CHN:HK:In CC: H. Kamigaki S. Tomita 81-948 Waena'Oihana Loop #101 - Hi 196750 - (661[4 32/2-2484 vHAWAIIAN ISLANDS Q o ISLAND A October 20, 2003 COUNTY OF MNWNII Chris Yuen Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite # 3 `-\Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3034 De Chris Yuen, The Kona Soil and Water Conservation District reviewed the following 1 application regarding: Change of Zone Application: (REZ 03-025) \� REZ\\Q3-025-(SMA) 03-015): Lehua Lani, LLC TMK: 7-5-20:71 & 72 _ IVo comment or objections. Nciiun c; hvoc n��s ` � \\ rBob Nelson, Chairman Kona Soil and Water Conservation District i cc: Kiran Emler C.E. BN/ls I 1 I, I EXHIBIT 0 FAX (808) 322-3735 II , ,=r."Z, x.A SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: 0,'7 3 11r 73 October 12. 2001 l • Planning • Variance • Zoning • Subdivision • Land Use Permits • Environmental Reports 1757 Subject: Rezoning (REZ 03-025) and SMA 03-015 Applications Lehua Lani, LLC, TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72 Transmitted herewith for your appropriate action are the original requests for standing in a contested case hearing on the subject matter which I received this date in the mail. A couple, Robert Russell and Lillian Fox, and Devra Wijet made these requests. Please note that although the requests noted objections to the project, there was no filing fee attached. In relation to the Office of Housing and Community Development's comments, please note that the applicant intends to comply with the County's Affordable Housing Code. This will probably come in the form of ah in lieu contribution. If there are further questions/comments on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. incerely, SIDNE�KE Planning Consultant Copy — OHCD Lehua Lani LLC w/ enclosures EXHIBIT u -q, Sidneycuke, consultant miff 100 Pauahi Street, Suite9-1S 212 •Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone: (808) 969-1522 •Fax: (808) 969-7996 October 22, 2003 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: • Planning • Variance • Zonina I • Subdivision . Land Use Permits i,'J� 11nT • Environmental Reports 7 rim 1J Subject: Rezoning (REZ 03-025) and SMA 03-015 Applications Lehua Lani LLC, TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72_ Thank you for providing me with agency and related comments to date regarding the subject matter. In response to the comments, we would like to note the following: Hawaii Electric Light Company The utility company noted that there is sufficient capacity to service this project. Further, the applicant's consulting engineer will confer with the company later this year to review scheduling and related matters. Please also note that the project is designed to be energy efficient, wherein the design and placement of structures will take into account natural airflow and light. Additional energy reduction measures would include the use of heat reduction material, particularly for the windows, solar systems, and the like. Fire Department The requirements of the Fire Department relative to access, water pressure, and fire hydrants will be complied with. These issues will be addressed in detail during the building and infrastructure permitting process. Kona Traffic Safety Committee Generally, the comments of the KTSC are well taken and constructive. It should be noted that the applicant or, for that matter, any other single applicant/developer cannot reasonably implement many of the recommendations, as they require considerable funds and/or participation by other parties as well as regional issues. Nevertheless, to the extent the applicant can address the comments and take action to mitigate impacts directly associated by this project, the applicant would. In the area of density, the applicant notes that most of the surrounding areas fronting Alii Drive have relatively high density zoning. The zoning includes RM -4, RM -2, and RM -1.5, which translate to 10 to 29 units/acre). The applicant is seeking a r. S 0 Li• C Mr. Christopher Yuen October 22, 2003 Page 2 less dense zoning of RS -7.5 zoning (5-6 units/acre). At the same time, the County General Plan LUPAG map designates this general area for Resort and Urban Expansion, which would allow consideration for a density higher than the requested RS -7.5 zoning. Then, too, the draft Kona Regional Plan also suggests this area would be appropriate for RES -10 (10 units/acre) density. This is not to suggest that the existing and planned higher density zonings are appropriate or a trend to be followed. It is more to factually state that the requested RS -7.5 zoning would result in a density that would be considerably less than many of its neighbors. Notwithstanding the above, it has been the applicant's intent to have 58 units on the property. Accordingly, the requested rezoning could have been RM -7.5. However, under that basis, the design of the project would probably be different, as that zoning would allow multiple -family structures with heights up to 45 feet and a concentrated parking area. With the RS -7.5 zoning, the project would be restricted to single-family units, with heights limited to 35 feet and parking dispersed throughout the site. The applicant thus chose to proceed with the RS -7.5 instead of the RM -7.5 zoning to eliminate the possibility of having multiple family units with taller structures and concentrated parking areas. In the area of Pedestrian Safety within the project area, the applicant will look into the possibility of having dedicated pedestrian paths throughout the site to minimize vehicular conflicts. This will be specifically addressed in conjunction with the Planned Unit Development (PUD) application that would be filed if the pending applications were approved. Relative to external Traffic, a copy of the KTSC's letter has been provided to the consulting traffic engineer for comments. A follow up response will be provided you upon its receipt. In terms of Emergency and Service Vehicle Access, the access requirements of the Fire Department will have to be complied with. The Fire Department requires access and turnaround areas. We would also note that the planned 18 -foot pavement would he generally consistent with the Subdivision Code for private roads. The Code calls for a 16 -foot pavement serving a 6 -lot subdivision. Not counting the proposed "corner" lots, the rear access lanes will service 5 lots on one side. Additionally, the applicant would like to emphasize that the roadway design is intended to be similar to the Malulani Subdivision, a project which has met with appropriate fire and emergency vehicle requirements. Accordingly, the applicant maintains that the 18 -foot rear access road is sufficient. Mr. Christopher Yuen October 22, 2003 Page 3 The issue of pedestrian safety for students walking along Ali' i Drive (or for that matter, any street) is understandable. There will regrettably be motorists who do not always heed the requirement to stop when a bus picks up and drops off students. With the completion of the Alii Parkway, it may be possible for students to gain direct access to Kahakai School along the Parkway rather than from Alii Drive. This may also be achievable sooner if property owners to the south agree to provide a pedestrian access over their properties. The applicant, however, does not have the ability to mandate an access over those. Furthermore, it would not be feasible for the applicant to purchase these properties and/or easement rights. Again, thank you for this response opportunity. If there are further questions and/or comments on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely, �P 4 �V0" SONEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy — HELCO Fire Department Kona Traffic Safety Committee Lehua Lani LLC w/ enclosures Bruce Witcher Engineering w/ enclosure 11OV- 5-03 WED ;i::07 N FN;. SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant too PaUahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone: (900) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: October 31, 2003 7il93 NU 9 pm 1 05 TI,AT-NT Psi % ;U M. Subject: Rezoning (REZ 03-025) and SMA 03-015 Applications Lehus Lani LLC TMK• 7-5-20: 71 & 72 • Planning • VarianCB • ZOnky • Subdimson • tend Use Pencils • Ewrwmenlal ReRons Thank you for providing me with additional agency comments regarding the subject matter. We acknowledge that the Kona Soil and Water Conservation District did not have any objections or comments on these applications. Relative to the other agencies' comments, however, we would like to note the following: State Department of Health As recommended by the Department of Health, the applicant will have the project connect to the County's sewer line fronting Alii Drive. Furthermore, the consulting engineer is aware of the possible need of National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and UIC permits. As such, if needed, said permit(s) will be secured prior to commencement of any construction activity on the subject site. Police Department The consulting traffic engineer concluded that a left -tum storage lane was not necessary, as having such a lane would not affect the existing and/or projected level of service on Ali' i Drive. However, in light of the Police Department's comments, I am requesting comments from the engineer on this matter and will get back to you again upon receipt of the engineer's comments. Department of Parks and Recreation We would like to initially note that the subject property is located in the North and not in the South Kona district. Notwithstanding that clarification, the applicant is aware of the County's requirement — as part of the rezoning process — of a recreational impact fee as a condition of any residential rezoning. The applicant is prepared to contribute to such an assessment to further the cause for additional recreational improvements in the area. `, ��'�., .J WED 1'_':05 FM eAx Nv. Mr. Christopher Yuen October 31, 2003 Page 2 Additionally, the open space areas within the project site will be owned and maintained by the project's association. There is no plan to have these areas converted in the future for non -open space uses. Again, thank you for this response opportunity. If there are further questions and/or comments on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Vincerely, S NEYKE D Planning Consultant Copy — State Department of Health Police Department Department of Parks and Recreation Lehua Lani LLC w/ enclosures Bruce Witcher Engineering w/ enclosure Monte SidneyFuke, Planning Consultant 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • Planning • variance • Zoning arwTelephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 `� `77^ • Subdivision • Land Use Permits j (1 • Environmental Reports October 31, 200'-, L 003- L Mr. Christopher Yuen. Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning (REZ 03-025) and SMA 03-015 Applications Lehua Lani, LLC, TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72 Pursuant to my discussion with Mr. Bennett Mark of your staff, please find enclosed a copy of pertinent correspondences between the consulting archaeologist (Paul Rosendahl, Ph.D. of PHRI) and the State Historic Preservation Division of the DLNR regarding the archaeological inventory survey and related matters. Specifically, these include: a. Letter, dated July 15, 2003. from PHRI to SHPD requesting its review and approval of the Archaeological Inventory Survey report; b. Letter, dated August 26, 2003, from SHPD to PHRI commenting that the inventory survey report needed some revisions; C. Letter, dated October 6, 2003, from PHRI to SHPD submitting the revised inventory survey report, and d. Letter, dated September 16, 2003, from PHRI to SHPD requesting review and approval of the Burial Treatment Plan (BTM). Please note that as of this date. there have been no responses from SHPD regarding the revised inventory survey report or the BTM. Upon their receipt. a copy will be provided your office. If there are further questions and/or comments on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. Sincerely SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Enclosures Copy — Lehua Lani LLC w/ enclosures M 10/31%2003 10:44 808-9t 998 PHRI PAGE 02 July 15, 2003 Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. • Historical • Cultural Resource Monoetment Studies & Servicer Weanwamus Av.n.e • Hilo. Hawaii 96720 • (800) 969-1767 • FAX (8011) 961- P.O. sox 27705 • G.M.F.. Guam 96911 . (671) 472.3117 • PAX (671) 612.1131 Dr. P. Holland McEldowncy, Acting Administrator State Histone Preservation Division Kakuhihewa Building, Room 555 601 Kamokila Boulevard Kepolei, Hawaii 96707 Subteet: Submusion ofPHRI Report 1340-070103 Archaeological Inventory Survey Alii Drive Parcels Land ofPuapua'a 1"°, North Kona District IslandofHawat'i (TMK:3.7.3.20:71,72) Dear Dr. McEldowney: At the instruction of our clients, Randy and Denise Farleigh, we are submitting for your review and comment a copy of PHRI Report 2340.070203, an inventory survey report for the Alii Drive Parcels project area. This report is a recently revised and upgraded version of a report originally written in 1991-1992 for fieldwork done in 1991. Prior to revising and upgrading the report, the circumstances of the project were discussed in detail with Dr. Ross Cordy, formerly of your office, and Dr. Patrick McCoy, SHPD staff archaeologist, and a course of action to complete the project was agreed upon. This is explained in detail in the Preface of the enclosed report. If you have any questions or comments. please call me at our Hilo office, (808)969.1763. Sincerely yours, Via_ ..x;1'1 ...r..9� Paui H. Ro11endahl, Ph.D. President and Principal Archaeologist $ncl: One bound copy of P11Rl Report :340-070103 cc Carrie Mcholson, Clark Realty Corporation. letter only MaryAnne Margret, SHPD Kona office A/31/22003 10:44 uwoA UMlolr 900-91 q9B PHRI August 26, 2003 STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES Dr. Paul Rosendahl PHRI 224 Waianuenue Avenue Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Dr. Rosendahl HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING, ROOM 566 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD KAPOLEI, HAWAII 96707 1 4U U J FILE P" T, mows r� �rwuou w w.rtn woou�a� w,uo4se7 o 0R1 -w 9ANe0T Y.W. UU OH V 1'I OIN�Ct011. vY1 V 1 LOG NO 2003.1563 DOC NO' 0308PMI I SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review of a Draft PHRI Report 2340- 070203: "Archaeological Inventory Survey Alii Drive Parcels" (Head, Goodfellow and Rosendahl, 2003), Puapua'a, North Kona, Hawaii Island TNM: (3) 7-5-20:71, 72 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above referenced draft report, which was received in our office July 16, 2003. The report was prepared for Clark Realty Corporation on behalf of their client, Randy and Denise Farleigh, who are the current owners of the subject parcel. As you note in the Preface, a draft report on the archaeological inventory survey of this parcel was completed in 1992 but never submitted to our office for review and approval. The 1992 draft report has been updated to meet current regulatory standards This involved a re- survey of the property in 2003 to relocate all of the sites and reassess the original significance evaluations and recommended site mitigation proposals. By prior agreement, new information has been presented in appendices to the report, which otherwise stands as written in 1992. The information presented in the historical and archaeological background sections of the report (in the main body of the report and Appendix C) is generally adequate for predicting the kinds of historic properties that might be found during the survey, In the Attachment we have noted the need to update the information regarding the Pualani Makai project. The background information is otherwise sufficient in terms of providing a context for understanding and evaluating the significance of sites found in the survey. We believe that the archaeological inventory survey of the roughly 10 -acre project area, which has now been covered twice (in 1991 and again in 2003), probably identified most of the major sites on the property. This is the conclusion reached by the authors, who in the process of evaluating the survey methodology on page 33, did note, however, that vegetation often RECEIVED SEP 2 2003 10/31/2003 10:44 808-P 3998 PHRI PAGE 04 Paul Rosendahl Page 2 hampered field observations. This statement, which is not addressed again in the survey update in Appendix C, suggests that vegetation may have been a limiting factor in achieving the goal of a 100%, high-intensity ground survey. The effect of vegetation on survey completeness needs to be addressed in the report. The number of sites in the project area is also in question. Throughout the main report there is reference to 14 sites --three previously identified sites (6335, 6336, 6337) and 11 new sites (15108, 16111-16119, 16133). A portion of one other site (63 25) is shown on the project area map and described in Appendix C, but not included in the inventory even though it is located within the project area. The addition of Site 6325 would make 15 sites There appears to be a sound basis for assigning even more site numbers (see Attachment for details). We agree, for example, with the assessment on page 35 of the report that Feature E (a probable ranch wall) of Site 6337 is functionally and chronologically unrelated to the other features and should be regarded as a separate site. The number of sites in the project area needs to be reassessed in preparing a revised report. The sites found during the 1991 survey include a variety of pre -contact Hawaiian sites (habitations, agricultural feature complexes, and burials) and historic ranching period sites (walls and related animal husbandry features). Seventeen test units were excavated at six sites to aid in the interpretation of site function. Most of the sites have been adequately mapped and described; some have not, such as Site 16117, which lacks a pian map. There should be a plan map for every site, except for the walls. More stratigraphic profiles need to be added to adequately document the test excavations; only one was added to the report in Appendix C. We also have questions about the inferred functions of some sites (see Attachment for details). The discovery of two burials at Site 16116, amongst features previously thought or assumed to be agricultural features, obviously raises questions about the potential for more burials and the possible need for more testing as part of the inventory survey. This issue needs to be discussed in some detail before we can conclude that the inventory survey is complete and acceptable. In light of the several questions about survey completeness and site documentation, we cannot concur at this time with either the proposed site significance evaluations or recommended site treatments for the project area as a whole, except to say that we do not agree with the blanket recommendation for no further work. The number of problems that we have identified in the review of this report and recent reviews of other old reports that were updated to meet current standards, indicates to us that "updating" through the addition of new information in appendices is not a wholly successful strategy. One of the chief problems in this particular case is that the primary site data (descriptions, maps, photographs and excavation profiles) are presented in three different places in the report—in the main report, Appendix A, and Appendix C. The report is extremely difficult to read as a result. Another problem is that even though some of the background information has been updated in an appendix (e.g. the review of a recently completed or ongoing archaeological project, such as Pualani Mekai), the original overview of that project remains unchanged in the front of the report. It doesn't make sense to us to retain the original, incomplete summary of a project and 10/91/2003 10:44 see -9E 999 PHRI Paul Rosendahl Page 3 then add an update of that project. We now believe that the only successful way to update an old report is to undertake a thorough and complete revision and produce a single, coherent report. In view of our prior agreement, we will not ask you to pursue this course of action, although you might want to seriously consider it given the number of revisions to be made. Please revise the report and resubmit it for our continued review and approval. If you should have any questions about our review comments please contact our Hawaii Island archaeologist, Patrick McCoy, at 692-8029. Aloha, `7? N•-<l� /sly i-/c%w.-4.`, P. Holly McEldowney, Acting Administrator State Historic Preservation Division c. Chris Yuen, County of Hawaii Planning Department Kai Emler, County of Hawaii Department of Public Works Kamana'o Mills, SHPD Burial Sites Program 10/31/2003 10:44 808-� ;998 PHRI PAGE 06 . Paul Rosendahl Page 4 Attachment Detailed Comments on Draft Report "Archaeological Inventory Survey Alii Drive Parcels" (Read, Goodfellow and Rosendahl, 2003) Introduction Page 9. Where are the ubiquitous agricultural features previously mentioned? How was the sampling design developed to record and test a representative sample of agricultural features? The sample area is described as 2$ square meters, but the map indicates that the area is 25 meters by 25 meters, or 625 square meters. Please clarify. Previous Archaeological Research Pages 2.8 and Appendix C. The review of previous archaeological work in and near the project area appears to be relatively complete. It is difficult to follow, however, in the absence of a summary table and a map showing the locations of the various projects. Please add a project summary table and map to Appendix C, Page 2. According to the information presented here Features a and b of Site 6325 were recorded within the current project area in the 1973 ARCH survey of the Ali' i Drive Realignment Corridor, There is no further mention of Site 6325, however, until Appendix C, although some other features of the site are shown on Figure 2. The status of Site 6325 needs to be clarified, Findings Note: We have not undertaken a systematic review, of every site description and excavation. Some of the comments below may apply to other sites as well. All of the site data should be reviewed to ensure completeness and accuracy. General Comment. Plan maps of Site 16116, Features B -D were added to Appendix C, but the maps do not show the locations of the test units and there are no stratigraphic profiles for any of 10/31/2003 10:44 606-91 996 PHRI PAGE 07 Paul Rosendahl Page 5 the units, except for the Feature D excavation. There is also no plan map for Site 16117. All sites, except for the walls, should be depicted on a plan map. All excavation units should be shown on a plan map. Stratigraphic profiles should be included for all excavation units, except for possibly those with a single shallow layer with no cultural materials Page 10, Figures 3 and 5. One location on these two maps of Site 16116 is identified with the label "site tag/Pahoehoe sinker " What is a Pahoehoe sinker? Do you mean Pahoehoe sink? Please review and change as needed Also, please identify the location of the burial. Page 11. The summary of surface findings is incomplete because there is no discussion of the ubiquitous agricultural features mentioned earlier. This should be addressed in the survey update in Appendix C. Page 11, Site 16116 is first described here as an agricultural/burial complex. While the burials may have been found in the midst of a number of agricultural features, the decision to include the burials in the agricultural complex seems questionable. This is different in our view from burials in a habitation site. We suggest you give some thought to giving the burials a separate site number. A 25 square meter by 25 square meter section of the site was mapped It is not clear, however, how much area this site covers and what kind of sample this represents. Please clarify. Where are the boundaries of Site 16116 and how was this site distinguished from all of the other agricultural features distributed throughout the project area? Page 16; Figures 5 and 6. The excavation unit shown on this map is labeled TU -7. On Figure 6 there is a TU -1, but no TU -7. Please review and make the necessary changes. Figure 5 should show the locations of all of the test units that were excavated in this sample area of the site. Site 6337 Page 4; Figure 2 The definition of this site, as shown on this map, is highly questionable in our view. It includes a long wall (Feature E) that seems to be the boundary wall between the two lots, and three other scattered features 30 meters or more apart (Features B,C and D). There is no discussion of why all of these features have been grouped together, but on page 3 5 there is an admission that Feature E is probably not associated with the other features. We agree with this assessment and recommend that Feature E be given a separate site number Feature A is missing from this map. The description of this site on page 24 makes no reference to a Feature A which according to Table 2 is an enclosure. Please add a description and map of this feature. Page 25, Site 6337, Feature B The profile description should include bedrock. What kinds of cultural materials were found in Layers II and III? 10/.31/2003 10:44 308-9 1999 PHRI PAGE 09 Paul Rosendahl Page 6 You need to include a plan map of this site. Table 2 lists this as a habitation/agricultural platform. The single test unit was inconclusive in terms of providing information to help determine site function. This should have resulted in a recommendation for further work. Data Analyses Pages 26-27. The dates for Site 6337 appear to be much too early. The C 13/C 12 ratio is a clue to some kind of problem, especially when compared to most of the other'dates. At the very least there should be some further discussion of the Site 6337 dates in terms of their fit or lack of fit with the other dates. Pages 29 and 32. Tables 6 and 7. The cultural material from Site 6337, Feature B is not summarized in either of these tables. Please check to see that all of the cultural materials from the test excavations are summarized, Conclusion Page 37. What is the evidence that the burial found in Feature D of Site 16116 is historic? Appendix A Page A-1. Why are Sites 6335 and 6336 described as one? Page A-1 Again, why is there no Feature A of Site 63371 The feature designations in the description of Features B and D are reversed. Please check and change as needed. Page A-1. The use of the term "vaults" to describe the "planting boxes" in Site 15108 suggests something quite different. If these are actually vaults (arched masonry structures with a ceiling) it is hard to see how they could have functioned as planting enclosures. Structures with vaults in Hawai'i are more commonly burial features. The description and interpretation of this site needs to be clarified Testing of this site would also seem to be warranted. Appendix C The update of recent work in the ahupua'a seems to be relatively complete, but we noted that there is no reference to the work conducted in the Pualani Makai project area by Rechtman Consulting. This needs to be added, along with an update on the PHRI survey report and data recovery report (cited as Graves in prep, in the References Cited) for this project. The update should refer back to the overview of this project on pages 6 and 7 of the main report. Better yet, the relevant information for this project would all be summarized in one place. 10/31/1603 16:44 868-9 998 PHP: PAGE 69 Paul Aosendald Page 7 The evaluation of the survey methodology used in 1991 (page 33) left some uncertainty regarding the completeness of the survey because of less than optimal ground visibility due to vegetation. The summary of the 2003 fieldwork is silent on the issue of survey completeness, except that a portion of Site 6325 was found to be located in the project area. A more detailed summary of the 2003 fieldwork should be added to the report, including any new observations on the numerous agricultural features. Page C-8. It would be helpful to show the extent of bulldozing in the project area on a map. Page C-32. There is no Site 6325 in the inventory for this parcel in the main report, although it is shown on Figure 2 Page C-34, Figure C-22. Please add the test unit to the map. General Comment. The photographs that have been added to the report are too dark—at least in the copy we were sent—and thus of little or no value in terms of documenting site characteristics. We would hope that better photographs would be included in the revised report. 10/31;2003 10:44 October 6, 2003 Project 2340 Gee -9( 956 PHRI PAGE 11 r� Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. rchat010tic07 • Historical • Cultural aesoume Monalemsnt Studies & Services '/'taianusnue Avenue • Hilo. Har•'al4 96720 • (lost N9.176) - FAX (908) 961 •6991 ►.O. lo: 21105 • G.M.F., Guam 96911 • (671) 671.31 17 • 9AX (671) 471.3111 Dr. P. Holland McEldowncy, Acting Administrator State Historic Preservation Division Kakuhihewa Building, Room 555 601 Kamokila Boulevard Kapolsi, Hawaii 96707 Subect. Submission for Review PHA! Report 1340-093003 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Alii Drive Parcels Land of Puapua'a 1, North Kona District island ofHawai'i (TWK:3J4-10.71.71) Dear Dr. McEldowney: Enclosed for your approval is a copy of PHRI Report 2340-093003, for the Alit Drive Parcels project area in North Kona. This is a revised version of a report recently reviewed by your office (SHPD icMer dated 26 August 2003; Log No:2003.1563; Doc. No:0308PMI1). Revisions have been made per your review comments; for your convenience, the comments aro reproduced hem (attached), and we have individually addressed each comment and indicated on which page the revision is found. Thank you for your assistance on this project. If you have any questions, please call me at our main Hilo office (806) 969-1763. Si �y yours Paul . Rosendahl, D. Pmsident and Principal Archaeologist Erick One bound copy of PHRI Report 1340-093003 Attachment: SHPD Review Comments and PHAI.Respon+es cc: Carrie Nicholson, Clark Really Corporation, w10 report 10/31/2003 10:44 808-9E 998 PHRI P:,GE i2 Attachment Detailed Comments on Draft Report "Archaeological Inventory Survey AU'l Drive Parcels" (Bead, Goodfellow and Rosendahl,2003) Introduction Page 9. Where ate the ubiquitous agricultural features previously mentioned? Response. By ubiquitous we mean that, in general, the features are scattered throughout he project area in varying concentrations, }low was the sampling design developed to record and test a representative sample of agricultural features? Response. As a standard procedure at PHRI, sampling designs or other strategies that are exceptions to conventional practice, are first discussed with the SHPD and they are not implemented without SHPD sanction. In this case, the strategy was discussed in detail between PHRI Hawaii Projects Director Alan T Walker and Dr. Patrick McCoy of the SHPD (personal communication, Alan T. Walker, former PHRI Hawai't Projects Director, 10101103). 1t was agreed upon that a 25 by 25 mater square sample area deemed most representative of the features was to be selected and recorded in derail, and that this would be sufficient to document the numerous, ubiquitous minor features of the Kona Field Sysrem in the project area. The sample arca is described as 25 square meters, but the map indicates that the area is 25 meters by 25 meters, or 625 square meters. Please clarify. Response: no sentence now reads 21 meter square. Previous Archaeological Research Pages 2.8 and Appendix C. The review of previous archaeological work in and new the project area appears to be relatively complete. It is difficult to follow, however, in the absence of a summary table and a map showing the locations of the vatious projects. Please add a project summary table and map to Appendix C. Response: A project summary table and a map have been added ro Appendix C. Page 2. According to the information presented here Features A and 8 of Site 6325 were recorded within the current project area in the 1973 ARCH survey of the Ali'i Drive Realignment Corridor. There is no further mention of Site 6325, however, until Appendix C, although some other features of the site aro shown on Figure 2. The status of Site 6325 needs to be clarified. Response: We checked the original Ching of al. (1973) report; the statement that Features A and B of Site 61J1 were recorded within the current project area is incorrect. Ching at al. (1973) shows Features A and B just outside the project boundary. We have corrected the test, and Features A and 8 are shown as outside the project area on Figure Z. We have also clarified the status of Site 6311 (tee Appendix C page C -i, paragraph two.). Findings Note: We have not undertaken a systematic review of every site description and excavation. Some of the comments below may apply to other sites as well. All of the site data should be reviewed to ensure completeness and accuracy. Rarponse: We have checked all site descriptions and excavations for the problems noted in the following review comments. General Comment. Plan traps of Site 16116, Features B -D were added to Appendix C, but the maps do not show the locations of the test units sod them are no stratigraphie profiles for any of the units, except for the Feature D excavation. There is also no plan map for Site 16117. All sites, except for the walls, should be depicted on a plan map. All excavation units should be shown on a plan map. Strangraphie profiles should be included for all excavation units, except for possibly those with a single shallow layer with no cultural materials. 19!-1,11]193 19:44 99B-91 99B PHRI RAGE 13 Response: The plan malar for Site 16116, Feattazs B -D, now include locations of test units. All other site maps have also been checked, and all units placed are present on the maps. Other than the profile for the Feature D excavation, there are no excavation profiles, as they were not recorded in the fleid. As PH?! has maintained in several communications with the SHPD, during the time of the survey in the early 1990s it was standard PHRI practice to record only profiles that the supervising archaeologist deemed necessary; in other words a profile that would show a relationship to a structure, a particular sequence of layers, ere.; in other words. marten that could not be adequately described in a textual description. Of course, PHRI now clearly understands that today's SHPb standards require that all excavations placed be shown in a profile. The plan map for Site 16117 was not missing: it is on page I$ of the main rest. Page 10, Figures 3 and 5. One location on these two temps of Site 16116 is identified with the label "site tag/panoehoe sinker." What is a pahoehoe sinker? Do you mean pahoehoe sink? Please review and change as needed. Also, please identify the location of the burial, Response: The locations of the burials are now identified on Figure 3. "Pahoehoe sinker" has been removed from the maps, It was in reference to what appeared to be a basalt breadloaftinker; later analysis indicated the item was not a sinker at all, but a natural stone. Page 11 The summary of surface findings is incomplete because there is no discussion of the ubiquitous agricultural features mentioned earlier. This should be addressed in dee survey update in Appendix C. Response: A short summary has been added to Appendix C (page C-3). Page 11. Site 16116 is first described here as an aeculturallburial complex, While the burials may have been found in the midst of a number of agricultural features, the decision to include the burials in the agricultural complex seems questionable. This is different in our view from burials in at habitation site. We suggest you give some thought to giving the burials a separate site number. Response: After consideration, we have decided the buriais should remains as parr of the site, because we cannot justify why a burial should be separaredfrom its contest, no matter whether the burial is (bund in a cave, agricultural fields, or in a habitation structure. A 25 square meter by 25 square meter section of the site was mapped. It is not clear, however, how much area this site covers and what kind of sample this represents. Please clarify. Response: Figure 3 shows the entire area of the site and the sample area. So the total site area is clear, and the sample area is also clear. Who; kind of sample this represents is explained in paragraph three of the Field Methods and Procedures. and on page C-4, paragraph one, of Appendix C, Where are the boundaries of Site 16116 and how was this site distinguished from all of the other agricultural features distributed throughout the project area? Response: The boundaries of the site are now clearly shown on Figure 2, Site Location Map. The site was distinguished by its spatial contiguity. In other words, even though minor agricultural features are present throughout the vicinity they are not so continuous as to necessitate assigning arbitrary boundaries; sites were still distinguished by the normal processes ofspatiallfuncrional association. Page 16; Figures 5 and 6. The excavation unit shown on this map is labeled TU•7. On Figure 6 there is a TU -1, but no TU -7. Please review and make the necessary changes. Response We do not see any changes are necessary. Figure 3 shows both TU -7 and TU -3 of Site 16116. This is in agreement with the plan map of the site, which is Figure 3 on page 10. Figure 6 shows TU -1, Slid 16114, which is the onlv unit placed at the site. All other units placed at the site are shown on Figure 3, page 10. If we are missing something, please let us know. Figure 5 should show the locations of all of the test units that were excavated in this sample area of the site. Response: As mentioned immediately above, only TU -S and 771-7 were excavated in the sample area, and these are shown. site 6337 Page 4; Figure I. The definition of this rte, as shown on this map, is highly questionable in our view. It includes a long wall (Feature E) that seems to be the boundary wall between the two lots, and three odor scattered features 30 meters or more apart (Features B, C and D). There is no discussion of why all of these 16!31/2063 10:44 868-9 ,998 PHRI PAGE 14 features have been grouped together, but on page 35 there is an admission that Feature E is probably not associated with the other features. We agree with this assessment and recommend that Feature F be given a separate site number. Response: As indicated in the report, this site was initially identified during the Ching st al. (1973) survey. Hommon and Rosendahl (1983) added new features to the site, The its* was lard redefined by Walker (1991), and by Dunn and Rosendahl (1991). Subsequent to the current project the site was again totally redefined so that it currently has 14 features Noun et al. (1998). We believe it would not be wise to remove a feature from the site at this point. and give it a new sire number. That would create a discrepancy with the subsequent Haun et al. (1998) report and discrepancies with all previous reports in which that site has been described. Feature A rs missing from this map. The description of this site on page 24 makes no reference to a Feature A, which according to Table 2 is an enclosure. Please add a description and map of this feature. Response: Table 2 is in error. There is no Feature A at the site The table has been corrected. Page 25. Site 6337, Feature B. The profile description should include bedrock. Response: We don't understand what you mean when you spy "The profile description should include bedrock. " Please ecpiain We do not !pink you are re)etring to rhe test, since all other profiles it the report, and for that matter, all PHRI reports, don't include the basal bedrock layer in the profile descriptions. What kinds of cultural materials were found in Layers 11 and II17 Response A check of the field records indicates that the layers were apparently designated "cultural' because they had trace amounts of charcoal that were not collected. Since, in the absence of other cultural remains, such amounts of charcoal are difficult to confirm as cultural, we have removed the designation Site 16117 You need to include a plan map of this site. Response. A check indicates that the plan map for this site is already in the report as Figure 7. Table 2 lists this as a habitation/ag-icultural platform. The single test unit was inconclusive in terms of providing information to help determine site function. This should have resulted In a recommendation for further work. The platform was rested not for sirs function, but for presence absence of human remains (see page 13, paragraph 2). ,The results of time single unit placed, outlined on page 13, indicate the unit contained a small amount of charcoal and marine shell No burial remains were nored. The rest unit findings (the small amount of charcoal and marine shell), along with other factors. such as the size of the site and structural form) support a function of temporary habitation, which is a stated function of rhefeature. The agricultural function for the feature is based on the presence of the planting box within the structurs. We donor see how the findings of the single unit "should have resulted in a recommendation for further work " We contend that the findings support and confirm the original stared,&nction of the feature. Data Analyses Pages 26-27. The dates for Site 6337 appear to be much too early. The C13/C12 ratio is a clue to sonic kind of problem, especially when compared to most of the other clause. At the very least there should be some further discussion of the Site 6337 dates in terms of their fit or lack of fit with the other dates. Response. A /boniom in regard to the early ranges has been added to page 26. Pages 29 and 32. Tables 6 and 7. The cultural material from Site 6337, Feature B is not summarized in either of these tables. Please check to see that all of the cult usl matenals from the test excavations are summarized, Response: The errors were due to mislabeling Feature D as Feature B. Table 6 has been checked and was found to be accurate, except for the mislabeling of Feature D as Feature B. hlasruports such as waterworn rock and coral are not noted on the table but are referred to in the text. Table 7 u also accurate. Although it is stated on page 31, paragraph 3, that midden was found in 20 units, 18 of the units had only sparse amounts that were not retained by the 1;4 -,itch screen. Only 1/4-tcretn remains wen lobulated. 10/31/2003 10:44 808-S X998 PHRI Conclusion Page 37. What is the evidence that the burial found in Feature D of Site 16116 is historic? Response: A radiocarbon sample from layer 1, the stones overlying the burial, yielded a most likely radiocarbon range of AD 1790-1850 and an overall range of AD 1670-1955 (see page 16, paragraph7; page 35, paragraph I). Appendix A Page A -l. Why are Sites 6335 and 6336 described w ons? Response. The two sites are virtually identical in structural form; we have, however, separated them into two discrete descriptions. Page A -I. Again, why is there no Feature A of Site 63371 Response. Table 1 is in error. There is no Feature A at the site. The table has been corrected. The feature designations in the description of Features B and D are reversed. Please check and change as needed. Response: This has been corrected. Page A-1. The use of the term "vaults" to describe the "planting boxes" in Site 15108 suggests something quite different. If these are actually vaults (arched masonry structures with a ceiling) it is hard to see how they could have functioned as planting enclosures. Structures with vaults in Hawaii arc more commonly burial features. The description and interpretation of this site needs to be clarified. Testing of this site would 4130 seem to be warranted. Response: The word "vauit" is a misnomer, and it has been removed from the text. Appendix C The update of recent work in the ahupua'a seems to be relatively complete, but we noted that there is no reference to the work conducted in the Pualani Makai project area by Rechtman Consulting. This needs to be added, along with an update on the PHRI survey report and data recovery report (cited as Graves in prep. in the References Cited) for this project. The update should refer back to the overview of this project on pages 6 and 7 of the train report. Better yet, the relevant information for this project would all be summarized in one place. Response: The Rechanan report, and the PHRI survey reporr and data recovery report, have teen added to the update in Appendix C (see pages C-1 to C-3). The evaluation of the survey methodology used in 1991 (page 33) left some uncertainty regarding the completeness of the survey because of less than optimal ground visibility due to vegetation. Response: On page 8, in the first paragraph of the Field Methods and Procedures, it states that 100% of the project area was surveyed. In the "Evaluation of Survey Methodology" the text notes that the methodology was "effective and then it goes on to say that although dense vegetation often "hampered observations" visibility was ameliorated by the ciose spacing of transects, which averaged five to seven meters apart. Although the purpose of these sentences was to assure the reader that the methodology was adequate, they were taken as a suggestion that the survey might have been inadequate. The paragraph in question has been rewritten to make it absolutely clear that the survey was effective and that vegetation did not hamper observations. Seepage C-3, paragraph 4, for more derailed tnjbrmation on surface visibility to the project area during she inventory survo�v. The summary of the 2003 fieldwork is silent on the issue of survey completeness, except that a portion of Site 6325 was round to be located in the project area. A more detailed summary of the 2003 fieldwork should be added to the report, including any new observations on the numerous agricultural features. Response: We have added a more detailed summary of the 2003 fieldwork to Appendix C (page C•3. paragraph 4). Page C-8. It would be helpful to show the extent of bulldozing in the project area on a map. Response. The extent of the bulldozing has been added to Figure ?, page 4. 10/51/2005 10:44 668-S 3958 FHP: PAGE 1 Page C•32. Thele is no Site 6325 in the inventory for this parcel in the main report although it is shown on Figure :. Response: Since it was agreed upon that the updared portion would be separate from the main report, the inventory information for the site (since the site was ldennfisd during the 1003 flddwork) is pan of the update (Appendix C). The site v shown on Figure 1, however, since it did nor maks sense to have a duplicate of the figure in Appendix C, just to show the location of the site. Appendix C also assesses Site 69.3 and presents a recommended treatment, both of which are in concordance with the recommendations and treatments subsequently set forth in Hqun et al. (1998). We have added footnotes to Tables 2 and 8 to indicate that Site 6325 was added to tits inventory of ev the f eldwork for the o4nal inventory was completed and that the site ;s described in detail, and assessed Jor significance and treatment in Appendix C. Page G34, Figure C•22. Please add the test unit to the map. Response: The test unit has been added. The report has been checked so that all units art present on maps. General Comment. The photographs that have been added to the report are too dark—at least in the copy we were sent—and thus of little or no value in terms of documenting site characteristics. We would hope that better photographs would be included in the revised report. Response: We have included original black and white photographs in the report. Additional SHPD comment In the text of the letter, and not within the Attachment; The discovery of two burials at Site 16116 amongst features previously thought or assumed to be agricultural features, obviously raises questions about the potential for more burials, and the possible need for more testing as part of the inventory survey. This issue needs to be discussed in some detail before we can conclude that the inventory survey is complete and acceptable. In light of the several questions about survey completeness and site documentation, we cannot concur at this time with either the proposed site significance evaluations or recommended site treatment for the project area as a whole, except to say that we do not agree with the blanket recommendation for no further work. Response: We cannot find any statement that indicates the two burials were discovered in features "thought or assumed to be agricultural fearures."Page /1, paragraph seven, however, states that 17 units were placed in the project area in order to recover datable samples. to test for buried cultural deposits, and to test for presence absence of burials. In the case of the two platforms at Site 16116 (Features D and E), they were certainly tested because their structural form indicated they could be burials. In other words, we do not agree that more resting for burials is necessary because the current project already included a program for burial testing. ID/31/OM3 10:4, PHR M MI) l September 16, 2003 03-2341 PHRI PAGE '0 $=ILE Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. 0 rchteola(kal • Historical • Culture) Resource Management Studies & Servicer Walanuenu• Manu* • Hilo. Hawal'I 16770 • (804) 161,1763 • FAX (805) 1614T111 F.O. aog 133os • G.M.F.. Guam 16721 - (6711 471.311 i - FAX (671) 472.3131 Dr. P, Holland McEldowney, Acting Administrator State Historic Preservation Division Kakuhihewa Building, Room W 601 Kamokile Boulevard Kapolei, Hawaii 96707 Attention: Kai Markell, Administrator, Burials Program Subject: Submission ofPHRI Report 2341-071403 Burial Treatment Plan Alii Drive Parcels Land ojPuapua'a 2", North Kona DWrict, Island ofMawal'i (TMK: J -7-S-20:71,77) Dear Dr. McEldowney: At the request of our client, Mr. and Mrs. Randy Farleigh, I am submitting for your review and approval a copy of PHRI Report 2341.071403, for the treatment of burials identified to the Alii Drive Parcels project area. At the same time I am requesting that the project be placed on the agenda of the October 16, 2003 meeting of the Hawaii Island Burial Council (HIBC) for the purpose of determination regarding the proposed treatment contained within the burial treatment plan. I am also submitting twelve copies of the burial treatment plan for distribution and review by the HIBC members and burial program staff. If you have any questions or comments regarding this request, please call me at our Hilo office, (808)969-1763. Sincerely yours, RoaandahI, Ph.D. President and Principal Archaeologist Encl: Thirteen copies of'PXRI Report 2341-071403 cc: Mr. and Mrs. Randy Farleigh 10/31;2003 Oct 09 10:44 809-C 0998 PHRI rHut 03 12: ler -ehan h.Pore cud u-4:11)-,1 p.. !MDs, LW4L1 , ee!\MOR eR NMNu STATE OF HAWAII a 6 CEPARTNENT Of LAND ANO NATURAL RESOURC[S .,rtti HISTCRIC PRtSERVATION OIMPON KAKUHIHtWA BUILDING. ROOM SW an•^'" 001 KAMOKILA eOULEVARO KA►OLEI. HAWAII 9!707 AGENDA HAWAII ISLAND BURIAL COUNCEL MEETING DATE. THURSDAY, OCTOBER 16,10W 7mn: 10:00AM - 3:30PM PLACE: PUUANAHLTLU COMMUMIN CENTER 71-1490 MAMA.LAHOA HWY. KAXLUA-KONA, HI %740 L OPENING REMARKS IL APPROVAL OF JULY 179 3005 MINUTES W. BUSINESS FILE Aw..MYYY IYMCI lM Yv61MT114 .RWYNR'.P N..\Y YY►QWY. YYI eco 0/v� .w«ff! 110"ra Y M, UU bIMY 0/4Yw «awfK YNRW!! _ anc.uioaoaw uuuNe« YW=eaMVNse OeM1YOY.lF Ra/11 R!/MClM.T661f. f @MRYl, YM W R W WCN MeR: eNlnl Irh�NR/Y w+,s�w.11o �N,bW1 �-/'OIK «/INMMf lai .M/O..Ni4�NuY RNMN e'w..q/Wu }I«i/ YMY (A. AI I'I DRIVE PARCELS; LAND OF PUAPUA'A 2R°: NORTH KONA DISTRICT; ISLAND OF HAWAt�1(TFIIC:3-7-3.20:71,72) Iefornatfoo/Rtansseadatlon: Presentation ofburial treatment plan. Recognition of IineaUcultura l dascandants. B. HUALALAI VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT; WAIAHA; NORTH KONA DIST*CT; ISLAND OF HAWAI'I (T.MK:3-7-5-10:" InformatiolarRaeomuneadadon: PrasMation of burial trastment plan. Recognition of Iineal/cukural deso"ants. C. PU/ULAN! RANCH PHASE IL- PU'UANAMMU; NORTH KONA, ISLA14D OF HAWAII CTMK:7-1-06:Various) Determleatioe/Reeomnuadation: Formal council dew.. bunion to preserve in place or relowe sffected burials, and council recommendations to the Department of Land and Natural Rssourow regarding proposed burial treatment fbr site 50-10-20.20382. Discussion of burial ttwtment for Site 50-10-ZO-19413. Departmental discussion ofsaid project. Recognition of lineal/cultual descetdata. D. HOKULIA Iaformatioa/Recommeadstioa: Formal council datermnation to pteeene in place or Sidne 4 )/. �_ ._� fan _i?aia 100 Pauahi Street, Suite 212 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone: (808) 969-1522 • Fax: (808) 969-7996 November I, 2003r r 1 � l Mr. Christopher Yuen, Director Planning Department COUNTY OF HAWAII 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Rezoning (REZ 03-025) and SMA 03-015 Applications Lehua Lani, LLC, TMK: 7-5-20: 71 & 72 Pil • Vanance • Zon!po Subdivision • Lana Use Permits Environmental Reports As you are aware, I deferred responding to the Police Department and a portion of the Kona Traffic Safety Committee's comments pending receipt of the consulting traffic engineer's review of this matter. After discussing this matter with the traffic engineer, we would like to respond as follows: Police Department The applicant is aware that having dedicated left turn lanes to all streets and/or projects would facilitate through traffic movement and could reduce "rear end" accidents. However, having an abundance of such lanes could at times be hazardous, as through traffic would have to continuously swerve or veer right. And that, in and of itself, could be hazardous. Then, too, the additional lane must also take into account accesses on the opposite side of the street. As such, Federal studies and/or guidelines are available to help determine whether left turn lanes or other traffic mitigation (such as traffic lights) are warranted for a proposed land use. The reports, methodology, and guidelines utilized by the consulting engineer included the Highway Capacity Manual Special Report 209, 2nd Edition of the Transportation Research Board, 1992; Highway Capacity Software from the Federal Highway Administration and McTrans, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida; and Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual). Based on the above, the consulting engineer concluded that a left tum lane was not warranted for the proposed development. Kona Traffic Safety Committee Relative to the effects of this project on Alii Drive and mauka-makai traffic, the consulting engineer noted that traffic analysis standards require an evaluation of potential development of vacant land when a proposed development is over 100 units. In this case, the proposed number of units is only 58; as such, the analysis took into account existing traffic patterns and volume. `.-#.3:-4--7-1 Mr. Christopher Yuen November 17, 2003 Page 2 The consulting engineer also noted that a single -developer cannot determine the location of escape routes. That would require a broader regional analysis, a task usually assigned to the County. Additionally, the report did address the project's impact on the existing mauka-makai roads (i.e.. Lunapule Street and Royal Poinciana Drive) and concluded that the proposed development should not appreciably worsen the existing conditions. Relative to the comments of the Department of Public Works, we note the following: a. The applicant's consulting engineer will prepare the appropriate drainage study and/or plan prior to issuance of any land disturbance permits for the project. The plan will also reflect all project -generated water to be disposed on-site, and, if needed, the appropriate UIC permit will be secured to implement the approved plan. b. A grading and/or grubbing permit will be secured prior to any land disturbance activity. Additionally, in the event an NPDES permit is needed, it will be applied for and secured by the applicant. C. Relative to roadways, the applicant is willing to set aside additional right- of-way for the proposed Parkway with the understanding that 1) the additional area does not compromise the integrity of the applicant's project; 2) the area is determined prior to submittal of plans for PUD; and 3) appropriate impact fee credit is given for the relinquished land. Please note that an archaeological feature immediately makai side of the Parkway will be preserved. As such, any additional right-of-way desired by the County for the Parkway will have to address its intrusion into the site's buffer area. There will be only one access from the project to Alii Drive, the location of which would be subject to the approval of the Department of Public Works. The project will NOT be gated. As such, the depth of the access should not be an issue. Furthermore, none of the lots will have direct vehicular access to either Alii Drive or the Parkway. There will be direct pedestrian access, however, between the proposed lots and Alii Drive. The applicant may consider installing a "breakaway" gate to the Parkway that meets with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Mr. Upistopher Yuen November 17, 2003 Page 3 Should an additional 5 -feet fronting Alii Drive be required, the applicant again would have no objections with the understanding that appropriate impact fee credit would be given. Relative to the interior roadways, the applicant will be applying for a PUD that will address the specific interior roadway and right-of-way requirements. Although the proposed roadways and improvements within the rights-of-way will not conform to County dedicable standards, they will be sufficient to address safety and emergency access requirements. d. Finally, in the area of traffic. I would like to direct your attention to our responses to the Police Department and Kona Traffic Safety Committee. In response to the State Department of Education's comments, the applicant will have its contractor coordinate work schedules with the principal of Kahakai Elementary School to minimize construction dust, noise, and related impacts to the school. In terms of a school impact fee contribution, the applicant is hesitant to make such a commitment, as that amount is unknown at this time. Additionally, the County Council has not traditionally required such an imposition, and the applicant does not want to commit to a request that is not accepted County policy at this time. Again, thank you for this additional response opportunity. If there are further questions and/or comments on this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you very much. "ncerely/�� SIDNEY M. FUKE Planning Consultant Copy — Police Department Kona Traffic Safety Committee Department of Public Works Department of Education Lehua Lani LLC Bruce Witcher Engineering via FAX Michael Riehm via FAX NAME: ADDRESS: (Page 1 of 2) &Szl1 � 7 STATUS STATUS OF PETITIONER Is your interest in this matter clearly distinguishable from that of the general public? Yes }: No If the If or threatened injury: B. Are you a government agency whose jurisdiction includes the land involved in the subject request? Yes _ No _ If the answer is "yes", please explain the nature of the agency's jurisdiction: C. Do you lawfully reside on or have some property interest in the land involved in the subject request? Yes _ No _ If the answer is "yes", please explain: EXHIBIT ealmow" _ O- _ ! - b D. Are you a person or persons descended from native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778, who practiced those rights which were customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural, or religious purposes? Yes _ No _ If the answer is "yes", please submit any geneological evidence and historical evidence showing -the exercise of those rights to support the statement. PETITIONER'S SIGN STATE OF HAWAII ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HAWAII ) On this day of - - -- , 19_, before me personally appeared , to me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same as his free act and deed. Notary Public, State of Hawaii My commission expires: NAME: �Ma 01.161fflel• 100 100019021.2MX40-MG: Wall 11M 1. Be ),-e+ C)i) -e f ADDRESS: 7 5 A c ,S ;4 , G A. 0 C. STATUS OF PETITIONER Is your�interest in this matter clearly distinguishable from that of the general public? Yes J_ No _ If the answer is "yes", please explain: weVL!0 If the answer is "no", please explain how the proposed action will nevertheless cause you actual or threatened injury: -r L- T r _ 1 /S U e f f J- ,Pvt 1 A c jd--A.) a264 -_e noy s �— Are you a government agency whos . risdiction includes the land involved in the subject request? Yes — N If the answer is "yes", please explain the nature of the agency's jurisdiction: Do you lawfully reside on or have some property interest in the land involved in the subject request? Yes _ No _ If the answer is "yes", please explain: EXHIBIT D. Are you a person or persons descended from native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior 1778, who practiced those rights which were customarily and traditionally rctsed for subsistence, cultural, or religious purposes? Yes _ No jEl_ If the answer is "yes", please submit any geneological evidence and historical evidence showing,the exercise of those rights to support the statement. PETITIONER'S SIGNATURE STATE OF HAWAII ) ) SS. COUNTY OF HAWAII ) On this _ day of — --- , 19_, before me personally appeared me known to be the person described in and who executed the foregoing instrument, and acknowledged that he executed the same as his free act and deed. Notary Public, State of Hawaii My commission expires: to Harry Kim Mayor October 16, 2003 (90u fV of ClRiufvnii PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 (808)961-8288 • Fax(808)961-8742 Ms. Debra Wijet P.O. Box 546 Kailua-Kona, HI 96745-0546 Dear Ms. Wijet: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) SMA Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Lehua Lam, LLC TMK: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Christopher J. Yuen Direcror Roy R. Takemoto Deputy Dirccror We are in receipt of your Petition For Standing In Contested Case Hearing, which was sent to the applicant's representative, Mr. Sidney Fuke. Please be informed that your request is incomplete since the petition was not signed nor notarized. Further, you must also remit a $100.00 filing fee along with the petition. In light of the above, we are returning your petition. Please sign the petition and also have the petition notarized. Please also include the filing fee. Please send the petition to the County of Hawaii Planning Commission at 101 Pauahi Street. Suite 3, Hilo, Hawaii, 96720. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Norman Hayashi of this office at(808)961-8288. Sincerely, C�1R TOPHER J. YUEN Planning Director NH:syw pwpwin60\norm\1etters\wilet lehua lane 10-15-03 cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant Planning -Kona Enclosure — Original Petition EXHIBIT S — Harry Kim Mayor tnunfg of'aivafi PLANNING DEPARTMENT 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720-3043 October 16, 2003 (808) 961-8288 • Fax (808) 961-8742 Mr. Robert Russell Ms. Lillian Fox 75-6081 Alii Drive, # Y102 Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Dear Mr. Russell and Ms. Fox: Change of Zone Application (REZ 03-025) SMA Use Permit Application (SMA 03-015) Lehua Lani, LLC TMK: 7-5-20:71 & 72 Christopher J. Yuen Dido, Roy R. Takemoto Depwy Dimcior We are in receipt of your Petition For Standing In Contested Case Hearing, which was sent to the applicant's representative, Mr. Sidney Fuke. Please be informed that your request is incomplete since the petition was not notarized. Further, you must also remit a $100.00 filing fee along with the petition. In light of the above, we are returning your petition. Please have the petition notarized and also include the filing fee. Please send the petition to the County of Hawaii Planning Commission at 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3, Hilo, Hawaii, 96720. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Norman Hayashi of this office at(808)961-8288. Sincerely, Cl HRISTOPHER J. YUEN lanning Director NH:syw p:wpin60\north\letters\russeII — fox lehua Iani 10-15-03 cc: Mr. Sidney Fuke, Planning Consultant Planning - Kona -1 Enclosure — Original Petition _ LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII ��3 un STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 - HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 November 14, 2003 LD -NAV REZ03-025.RCM Honorable Christopher J. Yuen Planning Director County of Hawaii Planning Department 25 Aupuni Street, Room 109 Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4252 Dear Mr. Yuen: Subject: Change of Zone Application Special Management Area Use Permit I. D. Nos.: REZ 03-025 and SMA 03-015 Applicant: Lehua Lani LLC Authority: County of Hawaii Planning Department Location: Puapuaa 2"d, North Kona, Hawaii TMK: (3) 7-5-20: 071 and 072 PETER T. YOUNG DIAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND ANO NATURAL RESOURCES AWSVON ON WATER RESOLIRU MANAGEMEI.T DAN DAVIDSON DEP DIRECTOR - LAND ERNEST Y.W. LAU DEPUTY DIRECTOR- WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES ODAMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE LIANAGEMENI CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KA AWE IGLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. A copy of the document pertaining to the subject matter was distributed or made available to the following Department of Land and Natural Resources' Divisions for their review and comment: - Division of Forestry and Wildlife - Division of State Parks - Engineering Division - Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands - Land -Hawaii District Land office Attached is a copy of the Engineering Division comment. Based on the attached responses, the Department of Land and Natural Resources has no other comment to offer on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Nicholas A. Vaccaro of the Land Division Support Services Branch at 1-808-587-0384. Very truly yours, DIERDRE S. MAMIYA Administrator HDLO EXHIBIT �T' LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII LD/NAV STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 October 22, 2003 PETER T. YOUNG CHAIRPERSON BOARD O. IAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DAN DAVIDSON DEPUtY DIRECTOR - UM ERNEST Y.W. LAU DEPUTY DIRECTOR. WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOCI WE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS REZ03-025 Suspense Date: 11/5/03 MEMORANDUM:r- U% .J.'.I m L�C') TO: . XXX Division of Forestry & Wildlife - .. r -J ? r^ Division of Aquatic Resources rn Na Ala Hale Trails n o XXX Division of State Parks = = Iv ' Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation —IN' XXX Engineering Division - Commission on Water Resource Management XXX Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands XXX Hawaii District Land Office FROM: Dierdre S. Mamiya, Adminis� Land Division SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA 03-015 and REZ 03-025 - TMK (3) 7-5-20: 71 and 72 Lehua Lani, LLC - Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii Please review the document pertaining to the subject matter and submit your comments (if any) on Division letterhead signed and dated by the suspense date. Should you have any questions, please contact Nicholas A. Vaccaro at ext.: 7-038,4. If this office does not receive your comments by the suspense date, we will assume there are no comments. ( ) We have no comments. P�Omments attached. Date: DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DMSION LD/NAV Rett r2J3_q�r COMMENTS Q/ We confirm that the project site according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is located in Zone . () Please note that the project site according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is located in Zone () Please note that the correct Flood Zone Designation for the project site according to the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) is () Please note that the project must comply with the rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFiP), whenever work is required within a flood zone. If there are questions regarding the NFIP, please contact the State Coordinator, Mr. Sterling Yong, of the Department of Land and Natural Resources at 587-0248. If there are questions regarding flood ordinances, please call the applicable County coordinators below: () Mr. Robert Sumimoto at (808) 523-4254 or Mr. Mario Sin Li at (808) 5234247 of the City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting. () Mr. Kelly Gomes at (808) 961-8327 (Hilo) or Mr. Kiran Eniler at (808) 327-3530 (Kona) of the County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works. O Mr. Francis Cerizo at (808) 270-7771 of the County of Maui, Department of Planning. () Mr. Wallace Kudo at (808) 241-6620 of the County of Kauai, Department of Public Works. () The applicant should include project water demands and infrastructure required to meet water demands. Please note that the implementation of any State-sponsored projects requiring water service from the Honolulu Board of Water Supply system must first obtain water allocation credits from the Engineering Division before it can receive building permit and/or water meter. () The applicant should provide the water demands and calculations to the Engineering Division so that it can be included in the State Water Projects Plan Update. () Additional Comments: () Other: Should you have any questions, please call Mr. Andrew Monden of the Planning Branch at 587-0229. Signed: (_:; {_ Z ERIC T. HIRANO, CHIEF ENGINEER Date: ID�ZY�er3 LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 October 22, 2003 PETER T. YOUNG CHAIRPE^SON BOARD OF I AND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT DAN DAVIDSON DEPUTY DIRECTOR. NANO ERNEST Y.W. LAU DEPUTY DIRECTOR- WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL U NOS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMNESSION LAND STATE PARKS LD/NAV REZ03-025 Suspense Date: 11/5/03 MEMORANDUM:ADMINISTRATOR —_ASST ADMIN _ DELA BE TO: C" —_ c XXX Division of Forestry & Wildlife _foeNr'R FSNIGTBE c Division of Aquatic Resources _'.ERII:AL / Na Ala Hele Trailsxr �.i�ttiP+ASST BR ✓XXX Division of State Parks _UITERP m Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation ite rte- yQ XXX Engineering Division _CIRC/POST/STAFFRM Commission on Water Resource Management _L,iMMENTs&REC v XXX Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands __OKAFTREPLr C= XXX Hawaii District Land Office _FILE UP _FOLLOW INFO FROM: Dierdre S. Mamiya, Adminis� � _RUN COPIES Land Division _RUSH DUE SEE ME FAX/SEND COPY TO_ SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA 03-015 and REZ 03-025 - TMK (3) 7-5-20: 71 and 72 Lehua Lani, LLC - Puapuaa 2ntl, North Kona, Hawaii Please review the document pertaining to the subject matter and submit your comments (if any) on Division letterhead signed and dated by the suspense date. Should you have any questions, please contact Nicholas A. Vaccaro at ext.: 7-0384. If this office does not receive your comments by the suspense date, we will assume there are no comments. (% Ne have no comments. S - Signed: 8S -8 V LZ 130 100Z NO&I' Li � _lt/l 03AID38 ( ) Comments attached. Date: Id yo LINDA LINGLE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII LD/NAV REZ03-025 MEMORANDUM: TO: STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 October 22, 2003 PETER T. YOUNG CHAIRPE S BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MARAGEMENT DAN DAVIDSON DEPUTY DIRECTOR - LAND ERNEST Y.W. LAU DEPUTY DIRECTOR - WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENDMEERING FORESTRYANO WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION 10` C WE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE PARKS Suspense Date: 11/5/03 XXX Hawaii District Land Office FROM: Dierdre S. Mamiya, Admd&i > >R Land Division _ '— SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA 03-015 and REZ 03-025 — TMK (3) 7-5-20: 71 and 72 Lehua Lani, LLC — Puapuaa 2Dtl, North Kona, Hawaii `= < D cn o Please review the document pertaining to the subject matter and sutrtnit-your ommemIts (if any) on Division letterhead signed and dated by the suspense date. Should you have any questions, please contact Nicholas A. Vaccaro at ext.: 7-0384. If this office does not receive your comments by the suspense date, we will assume there are no COents. ( We have o comme ts. ( ) Comments attached. Date: 1 2 7l4 10 XXX Division of Forestry & Wildlife - - _� — Division of Aquatic Resources Na Ala Hele Trails XXX Division of State Parks Division of Boating and Ocean Recreation =- - XXX Engineering Division Commission on Water Resource Management )CXX Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands XXX Hawaii District Land Office FROM: Dierdre S. Mamiya, Admd&i > >R Land Division _ '— SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application and Special Management Area Use Permit SMA 03-015 and REZ 03-025 — TMK (3) 7-5-20: 71 and 72 Lehua Lani, LLC — Puapuaa 2Dtl, North Kona, Hawaii `= < D cn o Please review the document pertaining to the subject matter and sutrtnit-your ommemIts (if any) on Division letterhead signed and dated by the suspense date. Should you have any questions, please contact Nicholas A. Vaccaro at ext.: 7-0384. If this office does not receive your comments by the suspense date, we will assume there are no COents. ( We have o comme ts. ( ) Comments attached. Date: 1 2 7l4 10 RLehuaLaniREZ-11/17/03 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION LEHUA LANI, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-025) Upon careful review of the request for a Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A -5a) zoned district to a Single Family Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district to develop a 58 -unit single-family Planned Unit Development (PUD) for approximately 10.1 acres of land against the guidelines for granting a change of zone, the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation for a Change of Zone request be forwarded to the County Council. This recommendation does not, however, sanction the specific plans submitted with the application as they may be subject to change given the specific code and regulatory requirements of the affected agencies. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this recommendation based upon additional information presented at the public hearing. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: The applicant is requesting a Change of Zone from an Agricultural (A -5a) zoned district to a Single Family Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district to develop a 58 -unit single family Planned Unit Development (PUD) for approximately 10.1 acres of land. The applicant intends to construct 58 single-family residential dwellings on lots ranging from 4,000 to 6,000+ square feet, and about a %2 acre open space/archaeological preserve park adjacent to the planned Alii Parkway. 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 growth determined by the General Plan and 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 -5a) to a Single Family Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district will conform to, among others, the Land Use (Single Family Residential) and Housing elements of the General Plan. 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 reflects a graphic depiction of the physical relationship among the various land uses. The LUPAG Map establishes the basic urban and non -urban form for areas within the County. The subject area is designated Medium Density Urban and Urban Expansion Area. The Medium Density Urban designation may allow "Village and neighborhood commercial and residential (up to 35 units per acre) and related functions." Urban Expansion Area allows for a mix of high density, low density, industrial and/or open designations in areas where new settlements may be desirable, but where specific settlement pattern and mix of uses have not yet been determined. Within areas designated for development as resorts, portions of the resort area may be included in the urban expansion area. The proposed residential development would be consistent with these General Plan land use designations. The parcel to the north is zoned RM -2 and is developed with the AIN Lani condominium. The parcel to the south is zoned A -5a and contains the Alis Garden Marketplace. Ali'i Drive is located immediately to the west (makai) of the subject parcel. Parcels on the makai side of Alii Drive are zoned RM -1.5 and are developed with the Kona Riviera Villa and Kona by the Sea condominium projects. The proposed AIN Parkway forms the upper boundary of the subject site. Mauka of the proposed Ali'i Parkway, the area is zoned RS -10 and is developed with the Kahakai Estates single-family residential project. Therefore, a favorable recommendation of this change of zone request will be consistent with the emerging land use pattern being established within this portion of North Kona. To allow the 4,000 to 6,000 -square foot sized lots and lesser setbacks within the RS -7.5 zoned district, the applicant intends to apply for a PUD permit after the change of zone is approved. The Planned Unit Development (PUD) is intended to encourage comprehensive site planning that adapts the design of the development to the land, by allowing diversification in the relationships of various uses, buildings, structures, open -2- spaces and yards, building heights, and lot sizes in planned building groups, while still insuring that the intent of the Zoning Code is observed. The minimum land area required for a PUD is two acres. The property is currently not used for any agricultural activities. The Federal Emergency Management Agency Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) designates the property as Zone "X", an area determined to be outside of the 500 -year flood plain. The property slopes from its eastern to its southern boundary at a grade between two and four percent. The elevation of the site varies from approximately 40 feet at the southeastern corner to less than 20 feet along the AIN Drive frontage. The property is unclassified by the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) System. Soils within the property and surrounding area are classified as "E" or "Very Poor" for agricultural productivity by the Land Study Bureau. While the potential for intensive and/or extensive agricultural uses may exist, the soil conditions within the property and surrounding area would preclude such intensive agricultural activities from being conducted. The access to the project site will be from Alii Drive. According to the Department of Public Works (DPW), AIN Drive fronting the property is a two-lane County road with 20 -foot -wide pavement in good condition, with 6 -foot -wide paved shoulders, all within an approximately 50 -foot -wide right-of-way. According to the General Plan, Alis Drive shall be improved to a 60 -foot wide right-of-way. As such, the DPW requires the applicant to provide for the future road widening by dedicating one- half of the difference between the existing width of Alii Drive and 60 feet to the County as a condition of final subdivision approval, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy. The DPW, in the interests of pedestrian and bicyclist safety, requires the applicant to provide a paved shoulder extending to the right-of-way property line. The DPW may require pavement transitions, signs and markings, drainage improvements, and relocation of utilities. The DPW also requires the applicant to locate utility meter and pressure reducing valve vaults out of the right-of-way. The DPW requires that the applicant's access to Ali'i Drive provide adequate sight distances, be limited to one approach, and be located to avoid turning conflicts with existing developments, all of which must meet with the approval of DPW. The DPW I2 requires that the applicant provide a minimum of 45 feet of storage and turnaround on the Ali'i Drive side of any gated vehicle access. All driveway connections shall conform to Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, of the Hawaii County Code. The eastern boundary of the subject parcel is or will be the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Ali'i Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way. When this report was prepared, acquisition of the right-of-way had not been completed. The DPW requires that the subject property owner shall be required to provide any additional right-of-way, at no cost to the County, as established by and upon completion of the final right-of-way maps by DPW's consultant. The DPW requires that vehicular access to the individual lots shall not be from any major collector or arterial roadways. An emergency vehicular egress, with a breakaway gate, may be provided to AIN Highway, meeting with the approval of DPW. To serve the subject property and intermediate properties, the DPW requires that the applicant extend the existing two-way left turn lane improvements along the Ali'i Drive frontage of the subject property. The two-way left turn land improvements shall consist of, but not limited to, pavement widening, drainage improvements, street lights, signs and markings and any relocation of utilities, which must all meet with the approval of the DPW. The DPW also requires the applicant to construct and dedicate all improvements at no cost to the County. The DPW requires that all roadways within the proposed development follow the guidelines incorporated in the Hawaii Statewide Uniform Design Manual for Streets and Highways. The DPW requires that these roadways also meet the requirements of DPW. The DPW requires concrete curbs, gutters, and sidewalks, in areas of pedestrian traffic. The site is serviced by County water and wastewater systems. Electrical, telephone and cable services are available to the site. Police are located within 3 miles, and fire facilities are located within 5 miles. Kona Hospital is about 7 miles from the property. The Civil Defense Agency has stated that the proposed site is beyond the acceptable range of the nearest Emergency Warning Siren, and recommends that the developer purchase and install an approved Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren. -4- The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statutes, relating to Coastal Zone Management Area. The property is situated within the Special Management Area. It is located approximately 300 feet from the coastline and therefore, will not be impacted by coastal hazard and beach erosion. There are no identified recreational resources, public access to the shoreline or mountain areas, scenic and open space preserves, coastal ecosystems, marine resources or other natural and environmental resources in the project area. Thus, the proposed request and use of the property will not adversely impact those resources. Vegetation on the site consists primarily of introduced exotics. The site and much of the surrounding areas have or are being developed with structures, and it is not anticipated that endangered or threatened candidate species of flora or fauna are located within the subject property. The project area has not been identified as containing any significant botanical or biological habitat. An archaeological inventory survey of the subject site was performed by Paul H. Rosendahl, Inc., (PHRI), and a report was prepared in July 2003 which indicated the following: "During the survey 14 sites and 36 component features were identified. These included wall, enclosure, C -shape, terrace, concrete structure, mound, platform, modified outcrop, and well features. These features are prevalent in both the North Kona District and the island of Hawaii. The functions of these features were largely for habitation, agriculture, possible boundary, and burial. Of the 9 recorded terraces, 3 were thought to be paepae or sleeping houses, while the remaining were thought to be agricultural in nature. Of the 7 enclosures, 4 were thought to be related to animal/agricultural use, while the remaining appeared to be associated with habitation. There were 5 platforms identified, and all appeared to be of the late prehistoric or contact -era age. When tested, 2 of the features (features D & E at Site 16116) confirmed the presence of human remains. The others did not. Five mounds were identified, and these appeared to be agricultural in function, consistent with the Kona Field System. The 2 concrete features appeared to be of recent vintage and for animal husbandry. The 4 walls, the 2 modified outcrops, and the single C -shape appear to also have agricultural function. The C -shape appeared to provide shelter associated with the agricultural activity. There was one well found of the site. This well had a concrete and basal `apron' around it, a windmill tower, and an engine shed. It thus appeared to be of recent vintage. Relative to the sites on the -5- subject property, the survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation `as is,' with possible landscaping. If they have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. The applicant intends to preserve this site and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. In that event, a Burial Treatment Plan for this site will be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The plan will essentially call for the establishment of a landscaped buffer surrounding the site." The applicant believes that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts of the project will not be significant. The applicant noted that should there be any inadvertent finds during construction of the project, work will be stopped until clearance from the Planning Department has been secured. The archaeological inventory survey prepared by PHRI was originally conducted in 1991 and was updated in July 2003. To date, there is no record that the archaeological inventory survey had been submitted to the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) for acceptance and/or that the DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan. In view of the recent Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai O Ka Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed. These rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. Investigation of valued resources: The applicant presented the following information from which the Planning Commission can determine the valued cultural, historical, and natural area within the sought for the rezoning: archeological reconnaissance survey, including a historical survey of documentary records; botanical study; and faunal study. According to the applicant, since the subject site is not adjacent and/or nearby to the shoreline, and since there are no known identified trails going through the site, fishing and/or coastal access should not be an issue. According to the applicant, vegetation in this area consists primarily of introduced exotics. These include kiawe (Prosopis pallida), `opiuma (Pithecellobium dulce), African tulip (spathodea campanulata), koa-haole (Leucaena glauca), monkeypod (Samanea saman), lantana In (Lantana camara), guinea grass (Panicum maximum), bitter yam (Discorea bulbifera), and other exotic grasses and weeds. During a field survey by the applicant's archaeological consultant, one indigenous plant, ilima (Sida fallax) was noted. The applicant stated that it would not be likely that rare or endangered plant life would be found on the site, and that since the site and much of the surrounding areas have structures or are being developed with structures, it did not appear likely that rare or endangered animal life would be found on the site. The valuable cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the area sought for the Rezoning: Relative to the archeological and cultural sites on the subject property, the archeological inventory survey concluded that 13 of the 14 sites as being significant solely for their informational content and that no further work was recommended for these sites. The remaining site (16116), which consisted of 2 burial platforms, was recommended for preservation `as is,' with possible landscaping. Possible adverse effects or impairment of valued resources: The setting of the burials would be changed from the present condition of a relative natural setting to one where modern single family residential dwellings will be nearby. Further, the setting for the burials would be further altered by the close proximity of the future Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (AIN Highway) Phase 1 right-of-way, which would be located mauka of the burial sites. If the burial platforms have to be relocated, the survey recommended that further data collection be done. Another concern would be whether access to the burial sites by descendants would be possible through the private roads of this development. Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian dZhIE The applicant intends to preserve the burial sites and incorporate it as part of its landscaping/open space feature. A Burial Treatment Plan for this site must be prepared and submitted to the Hawaii Burial Council for its review and approval. The applicant has stated that the plan would essentially call for the establishment of a landscaped buffer surrounding the site. The applicant has stated that with the approved mitigation, the archaeological impacts of the project will not be significant. Regarding the access to the burials on the project site by descendants, the applicant has said that descendants will be allowed unfettered access to the burial site, as will be reflected in the approved Burial Treatment Plan. There is no record that DLNR-HPD has approved a preservation and mitigation plan, which would include the Burial Treatment Plan. Conditions of approval will be included relating to valued cultural resources to insure that impacts to these resources are minimized, and that traditional and customary Hawaiian rights to these resources are continued. Based on the above findings, the approval of the Change of Zone request from an Agricultural (A -5a) to a Residential (RS -7.5) zoned district would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further benefit the public. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-3 (North Kona Zone Map) of Chapter 25, Zoning Code, of the Hawaii County Code, is provided for your consideration of a favorable recommendation to the County Council. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. -g- Uehual a iREZ-11/17/03 LEHUA LANI, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 03-025) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. The applicant, its successor or assigns shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. B. Final subdivision approval shall be secured within five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance. C. Only one access from Alii Drive shall be allowed for the proposed subdivision meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. The subdivision roadway from Alii Drive shall provide a minimum of 45 feet of storage and turnaround on the Alii Drive side of any gated vehicle access. The roadway connection with Alii Drive shall conform to Chapter 22, Streets and Sidewalks, of the Hawaii County Code. D. A 10 -foot wide no vehicular access planting screen easement shall be delineated along all lots fronting Alii Drive. Vehicular access to the individual lots shall not be permitted from Alii Drive. E. A 5 -foot future road widening strip along the length of Alii Drive shall be dedicated to the County prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. F. A paved shoulder extending to the property line along the Alii Drive frontage of the property shall be provided meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. The paved shoulder improvements may include pavement transitions, signs, markings, drainage improvements, and relocation of utilities. Utility meter and pressure reducing valve vaults shall also be located outside of the right-of-way in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Public Works. G. The existing two-way left turn lane on Alii Drive fronting the adjacent property to the north shall be extended to serve the roadway entry of the subject property in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Public Works. The necessary improvements for the extension of the two-way left turn lane, which shall consist of, but not limited to, pavement widening, drainage improvements, streetlights, signs and markings, and relocation of utilities shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Public Works. These improvements shall be constructed and dedicated at no cost to the County. H. Any additional right-of-way necessary for the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (aka Alii Highway) as determined by the Department of Public Works shall be dedicated at no cost to the County. No vehicular access shall be allowed unto the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway. An emergency vehicular egress may be provided from the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway, with a breakaway gate, meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. 1. All development -generated runoff shall be disposed of on-site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. I A drainage study shall be prepared for review and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. The drainage improvements shall be constructed prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. K. Comply with Chapter 11-55, Water Pollution Control, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Department of Health, which requires an NPDES permit for certain construction activity. L. During construction, measures shall be taken to minimize the potential of both fugitive dust and runoff sedimentation. Such measures shall be in compliance with construction industry standards and practices utilized during construction projects of the State of Hawaii. M. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control of the Hawaii County Code. N. The U.S. Department of Army Corps of Engineers shall be contacted to identify whether a Federal Permit (including a Department of Army permit) is required for this project. The Planning Director shall be notified in writing as to whether such permit is required for the development of the project. O. An archaeological inventory survey shall be submitted to the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) for acceptance. The applicant shall obtain approval of a Preservation and Mitigation Plan, which shall include a Burial Treatment Plan, from the DLNR-HPD. The applicant shall include all of the DLNR-HPD mitigation measures and conditions specified in the Preservation and Mitigation Plan, including the Burial Treatment Plan, into the plans for the project, which shall be conditions of subdivision approval. P. The archaeological features on the mauka end of the project site shall be preserved and made a part of the project's approximately one -half -acre landscaping/open space buffer from the Kahului to Keauhou Parkway (Alii Highway). The burial site (16116) consisting of two burial platforms shall be preserved "as is." A landscaped buffer shall be placed surrounding the burial site, and the burial site shall incorporated into the project's landscaping/open space feature. Access to the burial site by descendants shall be allowed, consistent with the requirements of the Preservation and Mitigation Plan and Burial Treatment Plan approved by the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD). Q. Should any undiscovered remains of historic sites, such as rock walls, terraces, platforms, marine shell concentrations or human burials be encountered, work in the immediate area shall cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources -Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-HPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from the DLNR-HPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. R. The applicant, its successors or assigns, shall be responsible for ensuring that the proposed passive park site is preserved, maintained, and cared for in perpetuity. The applicant shall purchase and install an Emergency Outdoor Warning Siren, acceptable to the Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency. An Emergency Response Plan shall also be submitted to the Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency for review and approval prior to receipt of final subdivision approval. T. The applicant shall comply with the County of Hawaii's Affordable Housing Policy pursuant to Chapter 11, Article 1, Hawaii County Code. U. The applicant shall contribute to the development, funding, and/or construction of school facilities, on a fair share basis, as determined by and to the satisfaction of the State Department of Education. Terms of the contribution shall be agreed upon in writing by the applicant and the Department of Education prior to obtaining building permits. A copy of this agreement shall be filed with the Planning Department. V. The Applicant shall make its fair share contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the project with respect to parks, fire, police, solid waste disposal facilities and roads. The fair share contribution shall be initially based on representations contained within the change of zone application and may be increased or reduced proportionally if the lot counts are adjusted. The fair share contribution shall become due and payable prior to final subdivision approval for any portion of the property or its increments. The fair share contribution in a form of cash, land, facilities or any combination thereof shall be determined by the County Council. The fair share contribution may be adjusted annually beginning three years after the effective date of the change of zone ordinance, based on the percentage change in the Honolulu Consumer Price Index (HCPI). In lieu of paying the fair share contribution for other facility impacts, the applicant may construct such facilities related to roadway, park, fire, police, and solid waste disposal facilities with the approval of the appropriate agency(ies). W. Should the Council adopt a Unified Impact Fees Ordinance setting forth criteria for imposition of exactions or the assessment of impact fees, conditions included herein shall be credited towards the requirements of the Unified Impact Fee Ordinance. X. Comply with all applicable laws, rules, regulations and requirements of other affected agencies, including the Department of Water Supply. Y. An annual progress report shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to the anniversary date of this change of zone ordinance. The report shall include, but not be limited to, the status of the development and compliance with the conditions of approval. This condition shall remain in effect until all of the 4 conditions of approval have been satisfied and the Planning Director acknowledges that further reports are not required. Z. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within this ordinance may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 1. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the applicant, successors or assigns, and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. 2. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. 3. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of the change of zone. 4. The time extension granted shall be for a period not to exceed the period originally granted for performance (i.e., a condition to be performed within one year may be extended for up to one additional year). AA. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate rezoning of the property to its original or more appropriate designation. COUNTY OF I IAWAN ORDINANCE NO. STATE OF I AWAN BILL NO. (PLANNING DEPARTMENT) AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-3 (NORTH KONA ZONE MAP), ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING CODE) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE, BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM AGRICULTURAL (A -5a) TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL (RS -7.5) AT PUAPUAA 2nd, NORTH KONA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY 7-5-20:71 and 72. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-8-3, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code, is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Puapuaa 2nd, North Kona, Hawaii shall be Single Family Residential (RS -7.5): Beginning at a %2 inch pipe (found) the Northwesterly corner of this parcel of land, being also the Southwesterly corner of Lot 5-A and being a point on the Easterly side of Alii Drive, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAHELO" being 1,953.10 feet South and 1,089.37 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: Thence, for the next six (6) courses following along the remainder of Royal Patent 7819, Land Commission Award 8559-13, Apana 8 to William C. Lunalilo: 2400 41' 688.11 feet along Lot 5-A to a spike (found); 3300 34' 30" 48.96 feet to a spike (found); 2400 08' 50.00 feet to a Y2 inch pipe (found); Thence, following along Parcel B-1 on a curve to the left with a radius of 5,050.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 4. 3290 08' 176.27 feet to a'h inch pipe (found); 5. 3280 08' 57.30 feet along Parcel B-1 to a % inch pipe (found); 6. 570 52' 35" 739.70 feet along Lot 3-A to a V2 inch pipe (found); Thence, following along the Easterly side of Alii Drive on a curve to the right with a radius of 5,704.70 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 7. 1490 28' 31.5" 318.21 feet to the point of beginning and containing an area of 5.036 Acres. PARCEL`B" Beginning at a Yz inch pipe (found) the Southwesterly comer of this parcel of land, being also the Northwesterly corner of Lot 5-A and being a point on the Easterly side of Alii Drive, the coordinates of said point of beginning referred to Government Survey Triangulation Station "KAHELO" being 1,953.10 feet South and 1,089.37 feet East and running by azimuths measured clockwise from True South: 1 2 3. 4. 5. Thence, following along the Easterly side of Alii Drive on a curve to the right with a radius of 5,704.70 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 1520 43' 06" 327.47 feet to a spike (set); Thence, for the next five (5) courses following along the remainder of Royal Patent 7819, Land Commission Award 8559-B, Apana 8 to William C. Lunalilo; 2440 21' 50" 735.63 feet along Lot B-1 to a spike (found); Thence, following along Parcel B -I on a curve to the left with a radius of 5,050.00 feet, the chord azimuth and distance being: 3320 26' 22" 250.78 feet to a spike (found); 610 01' 50.00 feet along Parcel B-1 to a spike (found); 3300 34' 30" 29.67 feet along Parcel B-1 to a spike (found); -2- 6. 600 41' 688.11 feet along Lot 4-A to the point of beginning and containing an area of 5.106 Acres. All as shown on the map attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and by reference made a part hereof. SECTION 2. In accordance with Section 25-2-44, Hawaii County Code, the County Council finds the following conditions are: (1) Necessary to prevent circumstances which may be adverse to the public health, safety and welfare; or (2) Reasonably conceived to fulfill needs directly emanating from the land use proposed with respect to: (A) Protection of the public from the potentially deleterious effects of the proposed use, or (B) Fulfillment of the need for public service demands created by the proposed use. SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS SECTION 3. In the event that any portion of this ordinance is declared invalid, such invalidity shall not affect the other parts of this ordinance. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of 1st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII -3-