HomeMy WebLinkAboutRES 307 Draft 01 2008-2010COUNTY OF HAWAII
RESOLUTION NO. 307 10
STATE OF HAWAII
A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE TO ENTER INTO
NEGOTIATIONS FOR THE ACQUISITION OF THE LUCILE P. KINGMAN TRUST
PARCELS (TMKS: 7 -7 -008: 20, 31, and 100) IN THE AHUPUA'A OF PAHOEHOE 2ND
AND PAHOEHOE 3 NORTH KONA, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 42,
HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2005 EDITION, AS AMENDED).
WHEREAS, the Lucile P. Kingman Trust ( "Kingman Properties ") comprises three
distinct parcels totaling approximately 6.1838 acres in North Kona located near Mile Marker 4.0
on Ali'i Drive, and more particularly described by the following tax map key parcels:
7 -7 -008: 020, consisting of approximately 1.3016 acres;
7 -7 -008: 031, consisting of approximately 0.1722 acres;
7 -7 -008: 100, consisting of approximately 4.7100 acres; and
WHEREAS, the Kingman Properties are currently owned by one entity, the Lucile P.
Kingman Trust. Parcels 7 -7 -008: 020 and 7 -7 -008: 031 are developed. Parcel 7 -7 -008: 100 has
minimal development; and
WHEREAS, chapter 2, article 42, Hawai'i County Code, established the Public Access,
Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission; and
WHEREAS, section 2 -214, Hawai`i County Code, established the Public Access, Open
Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Fund; and
WHEREAS, section 2 -217, Hawaii County Code, provides, in pertinent part, that the
Commission's first duty and responsibility is, "To develop and submit to the Mayor an initial
island -wide prioritized list of qualifying lands worthy of preservation..." and for the priorities to
be "...listed on an island -wide rather than district basis "; and
WHEREAS, section 3 218(a), Hawai`i County Code, states, in pertinent part, "Where
there are multiple lands under consideration at any one time, priority shall be given to coastal
lands and lands where matching funding is available to leverage the County contribution."
While the Kingman Properties are not on the shoreline, they are mauka of Ali`i Drive from the
shoreline and will serve the beach parks. Matching funds are being solicited; and
WHEREAS, the Hawai`i County General Plan (February 2005 Edition) states, in
pertinent part, in section 8, Natural resources and shoreline, section 8.2 Goals:
(a) protect and conserve the natural resources from undue exploitation, encroachment
and damage,
(b) provide opportunities for recreational, economic, and educational needs without
despoiling or endangering natural resources,
WHEREAS, the 2009 Annual Report from the Public Access, Open Space and Natural
Resources Preservation Commission cited the purchase of the Kingman Properties, as a key
priority and ranked number 4 in its "Hawai`i County Public Access, Open Space and Natural
Resources Preservation Commission, 2009 Annual Report to the Mayor, December 31, 2009 ";
and
(c) protect and promote the prudent use of Hawai`i's unique, fragile, and significant
environmental and natural resources,
(e) protect and effectively manage Hawai`i's open space, watersheds, shoreline, and
natural areas,
(f) ensure that alterations to existing land forms, vegetation, and construction of
structures cause minimum adverse effect to water resources, and scenic and
recreational amenities and minimum danger of floods, landslides, erosion,
siltation, or failure in the event of an earthquake; and
WHEREAS, section 8.3 Policies states, in pertinent part;
(i) encourage an overall conservation ethic in the use of Hawai'i's resources by
protecting, preserving, and conserving the critical and significant natural
resources of the County of Hawai`i,
(j) encourage the protection of watersheds, forest, brush, and grassland from
destructive agents and uses,
(1) work with the appropriate State, Federal agencies, and private landowners to
establish a program to manage and protect identified watersheds,
(p) encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping,
(r) ensure public access is provided to the shoreline, public trails and hunting areas,
including free public parking where appropriate, and
(s) establish a system of pedestrian access trails to places of scenic, historic, cultural,
natural, or recreational values; and
WHEREAS, these properties are currently offered for sale and listed privately with a
Real Estate Broker; and
WHEREAS, the Hawai`i County General Plan (February 2005 Edition) states, in
pertinent part, in section 6 Historic Sites, 6.3 Policies, subsection (d), "Public access to
significant historic sites and objects shall be acquired, where appropriate." The Kingman
Properties include a portion of the Great Wall of Kuakini which was recommended for
preservation in the "Revised Archeological Data Recovery Plan for the Kingman Property,
TMK: 7 -7 -08: 20, 31, & 100 in Pahoehoe 2 and 3rd Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of
Hawai`i" by the State of Hawai`i, Historic Preservation Division DOC NO: 0306PM15 (Exhibit
B), and which shall be preserved in place and buffered before any development occurs; and
WHEREAS, the Kingman Properties also include five currently identified burial sites
identified in the "Revised Archeological Data Recovery Plan for the Kingman Property, TMK:
7 -7 -08: 20, 31, & 100 in Pahoehoe 2 " and 3" Ahupua'a, North Kona District, Island of
Hawaii' by the State of Hawai`i, Historic Preservation Division DOC NO: 0306PM15 (Exhibit
B); and that are recommended for Burial Treatment and require an approved Burial Treatment
Plan and which shall be preserved in place and buffered before any development occurs; and
WHEREAS, the Hawai`i County General Plan (February 2005 Edition) states, in
pertinent part, in section 5, Flooding and Other Natural Hazards, 5.2 Goals, that the county shall:
(c) control pollution,
(d) prevent damage from inundation,
(e) reduce surface water and sediment runoff; and
(f) maximize soil and water conservation; and
WHEREAS, section 5.3 Policies, of the same section, states the county shall:
(1) be responsible for maintaining and improving existing drainage systems and
constructing new drainage facilities,
(n) develop drainage master plans from a watershed perspective that considers non-
structural alternatives, minimizes channelization, protects wetlands that serve
drainage functions, coordinates the regulation of construction and agricultural
operation, and encourages the establishment of floodplains as public green ways,
and
(p) where applicable, natural drainage channels shall be improved to increase their
capacity with special consideration for the practices of proper soil conservation,
and grassland and forestry management; and
WHEREAS. the Kingman Properties include parcels 7- 7- 008:020 and 7- 7- 008:100 that
are within the Kaumalumalu floodplain and a small portion of 7 -7- 008:031 is also in the same
floodplain. Appropriate drainage and flood control measures are necessary for the floodplain to
protect Ali`i Drive and the Kona coastline; and
WHEREAS, the Hawai`i County General Plan (February 2005 Edition) states, in
pertinent part, in section 10, Public Facilities, 10.3 Protective services, and section 10.3.2
Policies:
(b) the establishment of a fire /police facility shall consider site size and locations that
permit quick and efficient vehicular access, and
(e) stations in outlying districts shall be based on the population to be served and
response time rather than on geographic district; and
WHEREAS, the Hawaii Fire Department is interested in building a fire station in the
Keauhou area and the mauka portion of TMK: 7 -7- 008:100 which provides access to the future
Keauhou — Kahalu'u Parkway (formerly the Ali`i Parkway, and soon to be renamed a third time)
by means of a long driveway connecting parcel (3) 7 -7- 008:100 to La'aloa Avenue to serve the
greater Keauhou area; and
WHEREAS, the Hawaii Police Department is interested in establishing a future police
substation on the Ali'i Drive portion of the parcels for increased visibility to and access for the
tourists and the community; and
3
WHEREAS, the Hawai`i County General Plan (February 2005 Edition) states, in
pertinent part, in section 12, Recreation, section 12.3 Policies;
(d) the use of land adjoining recreation areas shall be compatible with community
values, physical resources, and recreation potential,
(g) facilities for compatible multiple uses shall be provided.,
(h) provide facilities and a broad recreational program for all age groups, with special
considerations for the handicapped, the elderly, and young children,
(i) coordinate recreational programs and facilities with governmental and private
agencies and organizations. Innovative ideas for improving recreational facilities
and opportunities shall be considered,
(m) develop a network of pedestrian access trails to places of scenic, historic, natural
or recreational values. This system of trails shall provide, at a minimum, an
island -wide route connecting major parks and destinations,
(o) develop facilities and safe pathway systems for walking, jogging, and biking
activities,
(p) develop a recreation information dissemination system for the public's use, and
(q) revise the ordinance requiring subdivisions to provide land area for park and
recreational use or pay a fee in lieu thereof.
The community requires open space and a park that encompasses both an active area
serving the beaches and a passive park providing open space and walking trails. The active
portion shall be a community park with a pavilion, parking lot, and a comfort station with
outdoor shower(s) serving the Kingman Properties, Magic Sands Beach Park, and Pahoehoe
Beach Park. The parking lot will remove parked cars from the makai portion of Ali`i Drive to
the mauka side of Ali`i Drive opening the coastal view plane to everyone and provide increased
pedestrian safety; and
WHEREAS, in the interest of: 1) preservation of cultural resources, 2) reducing flooding
and protect access to the North Kona coastline, 3) improving flood control measures,
4) increasing fire safety, 5) providing a police substation presence in the area, 6) increasing
pedestrian safety, 7) ensuring recreational opportunities for both residents of Hawai'i and
tourists, and providing for the public health, safety, and welfare, the Kingman Properties as
described for TMKs: 7 -7- 008: 20, 31, and 100, as shown in the attachment labeled "Exhibit A ",
should be acquired by the county; now, therefore,
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII that the
director of finance is authorized to enter into negotiations for the acquisition of the Lucile P.
Kingman Trust for the Kingman Properties, pursuant to the terms of this resolution; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the director of finance is authorized to initiate any
funding mechanisms required for the acquisition of the Kingman Properties, in accordance with
Chapter 2, Article 42, Hawaii County Code, relating to the Public Access, Open Space, and
Natural Resources Preservation Fund and Commission, and possibly including but not limited to
funds from private sources, county departments, and Office of Hawaiian Affairs; and
4
ATTEST:
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Hawai`i County Council welcomes individuals
who are willing to share their expertise and engage with others in an open process to form a new
non - profit solely dedicated to the management of the Kingman Properties; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that should the Kingman Properties be acquired, the
department of parks and recreation is requested to select a community -based non - profit
organization that contains diverse community membership, namely with expertise in economics,
education, Hawaiian cultural practices, shoreline management, fundraising and community
building, and any other necessary skills to manage this public resource; and
BE IT FINALLY RESOLVED that the County Clerk shall forward a copy of this
resolution to the Honorable Mayor William Kenoi, the director of finance, the director of the
department of parks and recreation, the Office of Hawaiian Affairs; and the Hawai`i County
Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resources Preservation Commission.
Dated at
, Hawai`i, this day of , 2010.
INTRODUCED BY: -O
j � '�ratlt —� ./ v
COUNTY COUNCIL
County of Hawai`i
Hilo, Hawaii
I hereby certify that the foregoing RESOLUTION was by
the vote indicated to the right hereof adopted by the COUNCIL of the
County of Hawai`i on
COUNTY CLERK CHAIRMAN & PRESIDING OFFICER
COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII
5
ROLL CALL VOTE
ENRIQUES
FORD
GREENWELL
HOFFMANN
IKEDA
NAEOLE - BEASON
ONISHI
YAGONG
YOSHIMOTO
AYES
NOES
ABS
EX
Reference: C- 718 /Waived FC
RESOLUTION NO. 3 07 10
t yr'
• l A TT
.„•
EXHIBIT A — Kingman Park
IC A U hi A 7 IA A
/ 7 0 Z
._ H
12
Ar
.1■,..... -.■-- _ _ ,
__O --__
____ ( / i 2 • • 2E .. —
- , PHASE VI Z
`A.._ "i --- ,__?:___, .1 1_2!------- — 7:: : ,t • p.-1. - _
t'i ;?;--
• LA • LO ; like
• _-_-_.....-- 1.__---:-. ------___ ••••• _____: „. . _i , ;
•-. j 0 1.,:4
1 -- .....---,--
i I -I ''',,,',
/4/erS' '' \ 2-. /COI' "-- 'all'I HEIGHTS. -)., %, i
( t : („wa 7 NOM 11 / ..'. , i
• / N. . / ... • /'
Y. .
Wi
1'' '14
I ; P
a @ =
1 4 ',"
-- ----),
)%) 1
• - ,7,•
PLAT Ze //
7
___
'
..,. ,,,,..„, ........
Qi
----- 1.----, "'
0 ‘---- A /.//
:::: L/ NC 217 ‘
7 _______ .....<
, / /
I
.'",/ ', NIT ' UNIT / / 2,
2, I.
-.CI- - 1 '---------," \ PHASE IV
\ / /
--)
A ---ry PLAT 79
\ - --------- -.1 -AA-V ...„, / ,/ PHASE V
- ASE I /
--l< 1—
ow -- i
0. ---\
T» 1.----;-;
----- (&)
A
P
A
0
2326
A
PAHOEHOE - K ARAL AA L lE A (BEACH AEC.) N.K C>NA,
L
A
11
A
E
'
(
2 ei4 7*. E v.tal
0
r s ,
42 4 " •
LINDA LINGLE
GOVERNOR OF HAWN!
July 1, 2003
Mr. James Moore
Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific, Inc.
59 -624 Pupukea Road
Haleiwa, Hawaii 96712
Dear Mr. Moore:
STATE OF HAWAII
DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES
HISTORIC PRESERVA77ON DWISION
KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING, ROOM 555
601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD
KAPOLEI, HAWAII 98707
PETER T. YOUNG
CHAIRPERSON
BOARD OF UNO AND NATURAL RESOURCES
COMMISSION QUARTER RESOURCE ARANAGEMINT
DAN DAVIDSON
DEPUTY PRECTOR -LAND
ERNESTY.W. LAU
DEPUTY DIRECTOR •WATER
AQUATIC RESOURCES
BOATING ARID OCEAN RECREATION
BUREAU GR CONVEYANCES
COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS
CONSDNVARON ANDRESOIRCES ENFORGEMFNNT
ENGINEERS°
FORESIRYAND MOLES
NS.TOPJC PRESERVATION
KAHOOV.V,E ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION
LAND
STATE PARKS
LOG NO: 2003.1082
DOC NO: 0306PM15
SUBJECT: Chapter 6E -42 Historic Preservation Review of a Final Plan: "An
Archaeological Data Recovery Plan for the Kingman Property, TMK: 7 -7-
08:20, 31 and 100, in Pahoehoe 2 and 3 " Ahupna'a, North Kona District,
Island of Hawai'i" (Elmore and Kennedy 2003)
Thank you for your letter of June 25, 2003 and copy of the above referenced plan for our review
and comment. The plan was revised to respond to the comments in our review letter of May 15,
2003 (McEidowney to Elmore, Log No. 2003.0385; Doc No. 0304PM14).
The revised plan has satisfactorily addressed all of our earlier comments, except for the comment
on traditional Hawaiian residences known as kauhale, which is addressed in your cover letter.
Three research questions will be addressed in the data recovery research. In our May 15, 2003 .
review letter we indicated that the research objectives should be discussed in the context of
previous research and the kinds of data that are needed to address the research questions. As an
example, we noted that the research question on the relationship between Sites 18002 and 18005,
which you have conjectured might be components of a kauhale, should provide a brief
discussion of previous archaeological investigations of kauhale in the area, and the kinds of data
that would be required to address this question. This information is not contained within the
plan, but you have promised in your cover letter to include it in the final report on the data
recovery investigations. With this understanding your plan meets with our approval.
The plan indicates that a Preservation Plan for the Kuakini Wall (Site 6302) and revised Burial
Treatment Plan for all of the burials on the subject property (Sites 18006, 18010, 18013, and
18015) still need to be developed and submitted to our office for review and approval. Data
recovery should not proceed until these plans are in place.
EXHIBIT B
2
Mr. James Moore
Would you please mail a copy of the final revised plan to MaryAnne Maigret for our Kona office
library. If you should have any questions about this project please contact our Hawaii Island
archaeologist, Patrick McCoy at 692 -8029.
Aloha,
n „ar plc , uy
P. Holly McEldowney, Acting Administrator
State Historic Preservation Division
c. Kamana'o Mills, SHE'D Burial Sites Program
Chris Yuen, County of Hawaii Planning Department
Kai Embler, County of Hawaii Department of Public Works
Chair, Hawai' i Island Burial Council
Kamana'o Mills, Burial Sites Program
PM:ak
EXHIBIT B
1980
JOSEPH KENNEDY
Principal Archaeologist
Pat McCoy, Ph D , Hawai`i Island Archaeologist
Department of Land and Natural Resources,
State Historic Preservation Division
Kakuhihewa Building, Room 555
601 Kamokila Boulevard
Kapolei, Hawaii 96707
Dear Dr. McCoy,
Please find enclosed a revised copy of, "An Archaeological Data Recovery Plan
for the Kingman Property, TMK: 7 -7-08: 20, 31 and 100 in Pahoehoe 2 and 3
Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawaii ", to which we have incorporated the
suggested revisions as per your letter of May 15 2003 (LOG NO: 2003.0385, DOC NO:
0304PM14) and which we submit for your review. Please note that we have provided
only a limited discussion of kauhale in this document but will provide a thorough
discussion of previous investigations of kauhale in the region and a comparison between
the previous investigations and the findings of the currently proposed investigations in
our data recovery report.
As always, we would like to thank you in advance for your consideration of this
document. If you have any questions, please feel free to phone or fax.
cc• Mr. Peter Kingman
ARCHAEOLOGICAL CONSULTANTS
OF THE PACIFIC, INC.
June 25, 2003
e
es R. Moore
Senior Supervisor
ACP, Inc.
59-624 Pupukea Road • Haleiwa, Hawaii 96712
Telephone: (808) 638 -7442 • Fax: (806) 638 -0703
E -mail: ArchaeologyPacific ®mail.com or Kennedyeolava.net EXHIBIT B
Inventory Surveys • Data Recovery Studies • Monitoring • Burial Treatment Plans • Historical Studies
Qualified Expert Witness Testimony • Preservation Plans • NAQPRA Studies • Traditional Cultural Property Studies
A Revised Archaeological Data Recovery Plan
for the Kingman Property, TMK: 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 & 100
in Pahoehoe r and 3 Ahupua`a, North Kona District,
Island of Hawaii
Introduction
At the request of Mr. Peter Kingman, Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific, Inc.
(ACP) has prepared this revised Archaeological Data Recovery Plan for a property located at
TMK: 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 & 100 in the ahupua'a of Pahoehoe 2 and 3` district of North Kona,
island of Hawaii (see Figures 1 & 2). The property is currently owned by the Lucile P.
Kingman Trust.
A total of 20 sites of interest to historic preservation are located on the current subject
property. A portion of the property was subjected to archaeological investigations in the early
1970's as part of the Ali`i Drive Realignment Project (Ching 1973). Site 6302, Great Wall of
Kuakini, and Site 6351, an agricultural complex containing stone mounds and walls, were
recoded in the mauka (eastern) portion of the current subject parcel. An Inventory Survey of the
entire subject property was conducted in 1991 by Cultural Surveys Hawaii (CSH)(Borthwick,
Chiogioji, Colin & Hamtnatt 1997). Eighteen additional sites were recorded (Sites 18002
through 18019). Site types included agricultural (Sites 6351, 18008, 18016, 18017 & 18019),
human burial (18006, 18010, 18011, 18013 & 18015), boundary (6302, 18007 & 18012),
permanent habitation (18002 & 18005), temporary habitation (18004 & 18009), indeterminate
(18014 & 18018) and a twentieth century foundation (18003). In their report of the Inventory
Survey findings, Borthwick et at. (1997:i) recommended Site 6302 (Great Wall of Kuakini) for
Preservation, the burial sites were recommended for Burial Treatment, and the remaining 14 sites
were all reconunended for Data Recovery.
This plan presents the research design and methodology for Data Recovery investigations
at Sites 6351, 18002- 18005, 18007 - 18009,18012, 18014 and 18016 - 18019. The implementation
of this plan and the production of an approved Data Recovery report will help mitigate the
"adverse effect" proposed developments will have on the historic properties present on the
subject property. In addition, a Preservation Plan must be prepared and implemented in order to
protect Site 6302 and a Burial Treatment Plan must be prepared and implemented in order to
help mitigate the "adverse effect" of proposed development to Sites 18006, 18010, 18011, 18013
and 18015.
The Preservation Plan regarding Site 6302 has yet to be prepared and submitted to the
Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR -SHPD)
for review. Two Burial Treatment Plans have been prepared regarding Sites 18006, 18010,
18011, 18013 & 18015 and submitted to the DLNR -SHPD for review. Both were rejected.
Subsequently, a contested case hearing was held which determined that all human burials on the
subject property be preserved in place. A revised Burial Treatment Plan will need to be prepared
based upon the findings of the hearing and submitted to the DLNR -SHPD for final approval.
EXHIBIT B
Figure 1: Project Location on a Map of Hawaii
Pahoehoe 2nd & 3rd TMK 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 and 100
2
after: Spriggs and Tanaka 1988
EXHIBIT B
I
Ft: e 2: Location of the Sub' ect Pro. on a USGS Mat
1
• . I r
4 1 \ I ' N \ i l \ I . 11 '. 1 - :., _ 1111‘, o A I t ' 4 big
1
L-:;4... aa*valik sizitk ,,,, 14 my -
„ ip \wig, t Etz:70-11 A t %I
F► I if N
bm eo ' ( i IAA\ 1 ' +�� � I-. I, ST �.. . � - �. . �� .•
11k' ; ', \ S qrt1
' \\\1
�` N\ i 1s
r ( ' i 1 1 54 i \ < � I � • di" k
�u;w= , , c 1 K', ,; i 1 i 4411
' ) ;
Subject Property y. 1- I)J it ` I
., ,,,,, 3 _ i h ,,, i I , i 1 , i
1 t t j 1 ' 11
8.
i li1 / 41 C C, . : i •
re ' ' 1 0 \ A . I
Pahoehoe 2nd &.3rd TMK 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 and 100 source: USGS 7.5- Minute Series (Topographic) Map
Kealakekua Quadrangle 1982
EXHIBIT B
3 I,
I
Physical Setting
The subject property (TMK: 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 & 100) is located in Pahoehoe 2 " and 3rd
Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Hawai`i Island. The property is bordered by Ali`i Drive along
its mauki or western border, and by private properties along the north, east and south boundaries
(see Figure 3). In addition, the Great Wall of Kuakini (Site 6302) forms the eastern boundary of
the subject parcel. Currently, a two -story house is located on the subject property fronting AIi`i
Drive.
Borthwick et al. (1997) describe the vegetation on the subject property as follows:
The vegetation on the property is fairly dense and consists mainly of alien plants like koa
haole (Leucaena leucocephala), kiawe (Prosopis palltda), 'opiuma (Pithecellobium duke), guinea
grass (Panicum maximum), and morning glory vines (Ipomoea indica). An overgrowth of night-
blooming cereus (Hylocereus undatus) and wood rose (Meremia tuberosa) covers the north and
southwest edges of #18002 platform.
The subject property encompasses an area of approximately 7 acres. The property rises
in elevation from west to east (makki to mauka) from roughly 10 to 100 feet above mean sea
level. Sato, Ikeda, Paeth, Smythe and Takehiro (1973) describe the soils in the area as Punaluu
extremely rocky peat, with a typical stratigraphy of 4 inches of black peat underlain by pahoehoe
bedrock. The average rainfall for this area of Hawaii is 30 to 40 inches a year (Armstrong
1973).
4
EXHIBIT B
X
H
co
#VAefe 5ands l/r/J c
Associame.s .�
e�aC'�c 173)8G9 s,io_
1 * ' ' Ca, 203¢
1
Pahoehoe 2nd & 3rd TMK 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 and 100
Figure 3: TMK Map of Subject Property
Subject Property
L.wc.Ye ld K,:
G/
01 r 211Yee KEE'L rKOLdN/ na .. � / r / ti
0
A
'tc? 166 8
source: Department of Taxation, Tax Maps Bureau 1936
Site Descriptions
Previous archaeological investigations conducted on the current subject property have
identified twenty sites of significance to the interests of historic preservation (Ching 1973;
Borthwick et al. 1997). In the earlier investigations, Ching identified Site 6302 (the Great Wall
of Kuakini) and Site 6351 (an agricultural complex containing stone mounds and walls), both
located in the mauka (eastern) portion of the property. Subsequently, in the early 1990's,
Cultural Surveys Hawaii identified eighteen additional sites on the subject parcel (Sites 18002
through 18019)(see Figure 4). A variety of site types were identified by CSH including
agricultural (Sites 6351, 18008, 18016, 18017 & 18019), human burial (18006, 18010, 18011,
18013 & 18015), boundary (6302, 18007 & 18012), permanent habitation (18002 & 18005),
temporary habitation (18004 & 18009), indeterminate (18014 & 18018) and a twentieth century
foundation (18003)(Borthwick et al. 1997). As part of their Inventory Survey report, CSH
evaluated the significance of the sites as well as making recommendations concerning the
proposed treatments of the sites (refer to Table 1).
Of the twenty sites identified on the subject property, 14 were recommended for Data
Recovery (Sites 6351, 18002 - 18005,18007- 18009, 18012, 18014 and 18016- 18019). Table 2
presents a brief description of each site recommended for Data Recovery. For a more detailed
description of all of the sites identified including individual plan maps of sites/features as well as
the results of previous excavations, refer to Borthwick et al. (1997).
6
EXHIBIT B
Figure 4: Plan Map of Site Locations on Subject Property
Pahoehoe 2nd & 3rd TMK 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 and 100
source: Borthwick et al. 1997
Table 1: Site Summary Including Significance Criteria Evaluations
and Recommended Treatments
Significance Recommended
Site Feature Description Function Criteria Treatment
6302 Great Wall of Kualdni BN C, D & E P
6351 Wall & Mound Complex Ag D DR
18002 Platform PH D DR
18003 Platform HF D DR
18004 Enclosure & Walls TH D DR
A Enclosure
B Enclosure
C Wall
D Wall
18005 Platform PH D DR
18006 Platform B D & E P
18007 Enclosure BN D DR
18008 Modified Outcrop Ag D DR
18009 Enclosure TH D DR
18010 Platform PB D & E P
18011 Platforms PB D & E P
A Platforms
B Platform
8
EXHIBIT B
Table 1: Site Summary Including Significance Criteria Evaluations
and Recommended Treatments (cont.)
Significance Recommended
Site Feature Description Function Criteria Treatment
18012 Enclosure BN D DR
A Wall
B Wall
18013 Platform & Modified Outcrop B C, D & E P
A Platform
B Modified Outcrop
18014 Wall I D DR
18015 Wall & Platforms B D & E P
A Wall
B PIatform
C Platform
ID Platform
E Platform
F Platform
18016 Enclosure Ag D DR
18017 Platform Ag D DR
18018 Modified Outcrop I D DR
EXHIBIT B
Table 1: Site Summary Including Significance Criteria Evaluations
and Recommended Treatments (cont.)
Significance Recommended
Site Feature Description Function Criteria Treatment
18019 T aces Ag D DR
Code for Significance Evaluations
A - Site is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad
patterns of history.
13 - Site is associated with the lives of persons significant in the past.
C - Site embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of
construction; or is the work of a master; or possesses high artistic values; or represents a
significant distinguishable entity.
D - Site has yielded or is likely to yield information important in prehistory or history.
E - Site has Cultural Significance (heiau, shrine, burial, etc.).
NS - Not Significant.
NLS - No Longer Significant
Criteria A - D represent National Register of Historic Places criteria.
Criterion E represents Hawaii Register of Historic Places criterion.
NS and NLS represent designations acceptable to the DLNR -SHPD.
note:
Ag = Agricultural
TH = Temporary Habitation
PH = Permanent Habitation
HF = Historic Foundation
B = Burial
PB = Probable Burial
BN = Boundary
I = Indeterminate
P = Preservation
DR = Data Recovery
10
EXHIBIT B
Site
Site Type
Description
Size
Function
Probable
Age
6351
Wall and
mound
complexes
Complex containing numerous agricultural features
including mounds, walls, L- shapes, U- shapes, C.
shapes
Unknown
Agriculture
Pre - Contact
18002
Platform-
shaped
Large L-shaped platform in 2 segments; testing
revealed the larger N/S aligned segment to be a
permanent habitation, possibly from pre-Contact
Ones, while the E/W aligned segment appeared to
have been a twentieth century addition for a pump
house and/or early 20 century residence
N/S segment:
15.2 x 33.6m;
E/W segment:
18.2 x 32.5m
Permanent
habitation
Post - Contact
with possible
pre- Contact
component
18003
Platform
Testing and informant testimony revealed this site to
be of twentieth century construction, built by a
Korean stone mason as a foundation for an ice
house
12 x 19.8m
Ice house
foundation
Post - Contact
18004
Enclosures and
walls
Complex with 2 enclosures and 2 walls utilized for
temporary habitation; testing results indicate a pre -
Contact component
25 x 25m
Temporary
habitation
Pre - Contact
18005
Platform
Large platform likely a house site noted in Kuleana
claim for this parcel
7.5 x 16.2m
Permanent
habitation
Post - Contact
with possible
pre- Contact
component
18007
Enclosure
Cattle wall enclosing Sites 18004 and 18006, with
central wall dividing Sites 18004 and 18006
60.9 x
106.7m
Boundary
Post - Contact
18008
Modified
outcrop
Mounds and boulder aligtunents
Unknown
Agriculture
Pre - Contact
18009
Enclosure
Oval enclosure conjectured during Inventory Survey
to have been used for temporary habitation, though
no testing was done; could also have been
agricultural or an animal pen or enclosure
5.5 x 6.5m
Possible
temporary
habitation
Pre - Contact
18012
Enclosure
Enclosure containing 2 walls; associated with cattle
ranching
25 x 100m
Boundary
Post - Contact
18014
Wall
Low wide wall with paved surface
2.5 x 16m
Indeterminate
Post- Contact
18016
Enclosure
Square shaped enclosure
4 x 4,5m
Agriculture
Pre - Contact
18017
Platform/mound
and walls
Small platform or mound with 2 parallel walls
aligned with the slope
platform:
1.5 x 2.5m;
walls: 1.0 x
4.5m each
Agriculture
Pre - Contact
18018
Modified
outcrop
Modified outcrop forming a low platform, partially
faced, 3.5 x 4m paved area on surface
10.0 x 10.7m
Indeterminate
Pre - Contact
18019
Terraces
5 narrow interconnected terraces aligned on steep
slope
6.4 x 12.8m
Agriculture
Pre - Contact
Pahoehoe 2 and 3 TMK: 7 -7 -08: 20, 31 & 100
Table 2: Site Descriptions
11
ACP 2003
EXHIBIT B
Research Design
The previous investigations conducted on the subject property identified several classes
of archaeological sites including an agricultural complex, permanent and temporary habitation
sites, burials, an historic foundation, several boundary walls and features of indeterminate
function. The agricultural complex was initially identified by Ching in the early 1970's and
designated Site 6351. Subsequently, Borthwick et al. documented the site describing it as "an
agricultural complex made up of a cluster of rock mounds and walls (stacked pahoehoe cobbles)
of varying shapes (i.e., rectangular, L- shape, U- shape, and C- shape)" (1997:23). Borthwick et
al. also identified three structures within the complex of more formal construction; an enclosure
designated Site 18016, a platform designated Site 18017 and terracing designated Site 18019.
The presence of more formally constructed features within an agricultural complex is not
unusual. Previous studies have shown that some of the more formally constructed features found
within agricultural complexes have been utilized as "activity areas" (Schilt 1984, Moore, Elmore
& Kennedy 2001). Schilt had assigned the term "activity areas" to describe features where
specific agricultural activities took place such as stripping wauke, drying ipu, or processing lau
halo. These features likely consisted of minimal pole and thatch structures placed on platforms,
terraces or modified outcrops located within agricultural site complexes and utilized on a
temporary /seasonal basis for the agricultural activities described above. Additional activities
conducted at these types of features may have included tool manufacture, midday rest and/or a
minimal amount of food consumption.
The possibility that some of the more formally constructed features within the
agricultural complex may have been utilized as "activity areas" is the basis for the first research
question posed:
1) Are "activity areas" present within the agricultural complex formed by Sites 6351,
18016, 18017 and 18019? A secondary consideration of this research question is, were
the more formally constructed features of the complex used as "activity areas"?
Excavations will attempt to recover cultural materials indicative of agricultural processing
activities such as pieces of volcanic glass which could have been used for the stripping of wauke
or the processing of lau hala. Other types of artifacts which could be recovered (although for
some items the chances may be small) include stone acres or adze fragments, o'o (digging)
sticks, poi pounders, lithic debitage from tool manufacture, etc.. In addition, midden materials
indicative of food consumption may be found at "activity areas".
The second class of site identified on the subject property consists of habitation sites,
both permanent and temporary (i.e., Sites 18002, 18004, 18005 & 18009). Previous
investigations on the subject property indicated that the earliest use of these sites likely occurred
during the pre- Contact era, however no definitive evidence was provided to verify this
supposition, as no radiocarbon dates were obtained. Additional investigations on properties
located immediately to the north of the current subject property identified subsurface cultural
deposits with unusually early dates for the Kona coast (Site 19668 at TMK 7 -7 -08: 102 with
dates of AD 1289 -1670 and AD 1301 -1523; Site 19857 at TMK 7 -7 -08: 21 and 23 with dates of
12
EXHIBIT B
AD 1390 -1670 and AD 1390- 1650)(Borthwick et al. 1997). It is possible that these subsurface
deposits may continue onto the subject property and that some of the surface features may have
initially been constructed contemporaneously.
Borthwick et al. (1997:17) commented on the possibility of early occupation in this area:
The project area, which is within the shoreline zone (Cordy 1995), is situated directly
across (east) Ali'i Drive and an excellent canoe landing beach site, presently known as
"Magic Sands." During the pre - historic era the prized canoe landing may have made the
project area and vicinity one of the earlier or pioneer locales along the Kona Coast.
The possibility that the habitation sites were initially utilized early in the settlement of the
Kona coast is the basis for the second research question posed:
2) Is there a pre- Contact component to Sites 18002, 18004 and 18005?
The goal of this question is to determine if the sites were utilized in the pre - Contact period as
well as attempting to determine the earliest dates of utilization. Investigations will attempt to
recover datable material from stratigraphic proveniences containing traditional anthropomorphic
associations (such as levels containing traditionally manufactured Iithic material or levels at
which basal structural components of the features are embedded) and submit them for
radiocarbon analysis.
Although the previous investigations at Site 18002 did not reveal the age of utilization,
cultural materials recovered did indicate that permanent habitation likely occurred at this rather
large platform. Based on the morphology of Site 18005, it was conjectured that permanent
habitation occurred at this platform as well. The proximity of these two structures to one another
and their location near the coast suggest the possibility that these two sites may have been
associated structures within a traditional Hawaiian residence known as a kauhale.
Kauhale have been described as a group of structures comprising a single planter's
homestead (Handy & Handy 1972:290). Typically, the kauhale consisted of several structures
including the common, or sleeping house (hale noa), the men's house (hale mua), a cooking
house, a menstrual house (hale pe'a), a canoe house (halau wa 'a) and various work areas
(separate for men and women) such as the house for making tapa (hale ku 'a). This use of
separate structures was dictated by the kapu system. Men and women occupied separate
structures for eating and working. Handy and Handy (1972:301) discuss this separation of roles
between the sexes:
The division of labor in the kauhale was very definite in old Hawaiian times. Under the
system of strict kapu where the sanctity of the male was concerned, it was necessary that men of
the household be guarded against contamination of their food and working gear by women, who
were periodically "tmclean." Hence, the production and preparation of food devolved upon men
(as did likewise the offerings to the family gods in the mua), not upon women as later came to be
the custom after the formal overthrow of the old religious system (see Handy and pukui, 1958, pp.
9, 10). This basic principle led to an infinitude of restrictions upon what could or could not be
done by whom, in connection with the simplest activities of daily living.
13
EXHIBIT B
In contrast to eating and working, sleeping areas were common (Handy & Handy 1978:290).
Apple (1971:7) notes that most activities and sleeping would have occurred outdoors except in
the case of inclement weather or times of trouble:
Commoners usually slept outdoors, on mats stored during the day in their houses for
safekeeping. They crawled into their small thatched houses to sleep, day or night, during cold or
wet weather (Byron, 1828:107; Stewart, 1828:134). Once inside, commoners slept on the mat -
covered floor; men, women and children in a common dormitory, but in a definite order (Handy
and Pukui, 1958:9-10). Commoners did most of their living and working outdoors - there were
usually convenient shade trees nearby.
...The small houses of commoners served only intermittently as shelter - as desired, or as
required by weather. Commoners ...utilized their houses for storage, occasional shelter, and for
security.
The possibility that Sites 18002 and 18005 were two of the structures of a kauhale is the
basis for the third research question posed:
3) What is the relationship between Sites 18002 and 18005? Given the proximity
between these structures, the platforms may represent specific feature types within a
kauhale. This question may be answered through an examination of the following more
specific questions. What form of habitation occurred at these sites? Are there
specialized activity or use areas? Are there functional changes through time? Does the
nature of habitation vary through time? Was the area increasingly or decreasingly
utilized over time? Are there significant temporal contexts at which these changes
occurred and do these correlate with historically documented changes or influences?
Investigations will attempt to recover culturally deposited materials whose utilization would
have been restricted to a specific gender and thereby distinguish the function of the specific
platform. Items which could be recovered that are indicative of gender specific utilization
include kapu food items such as pig remains and specialized tools such as tapa beaters.
The inventory survey investigations conducted at Site 18004 included a limited amount
of subsurface testing. Based upon the recovery of a small quantity of culturally deposited
materials in addition to the informal nature of construction it was hypothesized that this site
functioned as a temporary habitation. In order to assess this hypothesis, a fourth research
question is posed:
4) What is the nature and function of Site 18004? What form of temporary habitation
occurred at this site? Are there specialized activity or use areas? A cattle wall was
constructed around this site as well as the neighboring Site 18006, which contains burials.
Why was Site 18004 fenced off in this manner?
The recommended investigations will attempt to identify structural components such as
pavements, hard- packed living surfaces and deposits containing cultural remains. Data will be
sought concerning the age of the site, the variety of food remains present as well as the variety of
tools and artifacts which were used at the site.
14
EXHIBIT B
Methodology of Data Recovery
In order to address the research questions formulated above, it is recommended that Data
Recovery consist of three components: 1) subsurface testing of specific habitation features and
potential "activity areas" within the agricultural complex through both controlled manual
excavation and a minimal amount of backhoe testing, 2) the detailed mapping of the agricultural
complex, and 3) the photographic recordation of sites not targeted for subsurface testing or
detailed mapping. Table 3 provides a summary of the methodology recommended for each site
and the specific recommendations are discussed below.
Subsurface Testing
Subsurface testing is recommended for three areas' 1) the agricultural complex formed
by Sites 6351, 18016, 18017 and 18019, 2) the platforms believed to have been utilized for
permanent habitation, Sites 18002 and 18005, and the surrounding area, and 3) the enclosed area
of Site 18004 believed to have been utilized for temporary habitation.
Specifically, for the agricultural complex formed by Sites 6351, 18016, 18017 and 18019
it is recommended that the more formally constructed features be tested. Previous investigations
have described an enclosure, a platform and terracing as well as L- shape, U- shape, and &shape
structures which are hypothesized to have been used for something other than simply agricultural
pursuits. In order to determine the function of these features, it is recommended that a series of
no more than twenty shovel test pits be excavated. In the event that cultural materials are
encountered during the excavation of the shovel test pits, no more than five controlled test units
measuring lm by 1m in size will be excavated to further document the cultural remains present.
At the permanent habitation structures, Sites 18002 and 18005, it is recommended that
two blocks of excavation be tested, one at each site. Areas with higher probabilities of
containing a greater density of subsurface deposits will be targeted. The shape of the block will
be determined by the field supervisor, and will be guided by an effort to expose promising areas
Each of the excavation blocks will measure four square meters and will be excavated in
individual lm by lm units. In addition, because of the possibility that subsurface cultural
deposits may be present in the vicinity of Site 18005, it is recommended that a minimal amount
of backhoe testing be conducted in this area. If significant subsurface cultural deposits are
encountered during backhoe testing, it is recommended that no more than two controlled test
units measuring lm by lm in size be excavated to further document the cultural remains present.
At the temporary habitation, Site 18004, it is recommended that three blocks of
excavation be tested. Each block will measure 3m by 3m in size and will be excavated in
individual lm by lm units. A total of four individual test units will be excavated in each block.
The field supervisor will determine the exact location of each of the excavations.
15
EXHIBIT B
Site
Methodology
6351
Subsurface testing, map & photograph
18002
Subsurface testing & photograph
18003
Photograph
18004
Subsurface testing & photograph
18005
Subsurface testing & photograph
18007
Photograph
18008
Photograph
18009
Photograph
18012
Photograph
18014
Photograph
18016
Subsurface testing, map & photograph
18017
Subsurface testing, map & photograph
18018
Photograph
18019
Subsurface testing, map & photograph
Table 3: Recommended Methodology of
Data Recove
Pahoehoe 2 IlQ and 3' TMK: 7 -7-08: 20, 31 & 100
16
ACP 2003
EXHIBIT B
All subsurface sampling will be conducted by manually excavating using standard
archaeological methods including excavating in controlled 10cm levels within natural
stratigraphic layers and the screening of soils using one - eighth inch mesh screens in order to
retrieve significant cultural deposits. Excavation will continue until a sterile level or bedrock is
encountered. Subsurface features will be bisected and screened separately from their
surrounding soil matrices. Soil samples will be collected from every 1Ocm level, placed in
airtight zip -lock bags and labeled for use in laboratory analyses. Midden and artifacts collected
from screened soils will be similarly bagged. Samples collected for radiocarbon dating will be
gathered, without corning into contact with human skin, wrapped in aluminum foil and sealed in
a labeled airtight zip -lock bag. Profiles and plan views of test units and features will be drawn
and photographed.
Mapping
Previous archaeological investigations have not mapped the agricultural complex formed
by Sites 6351, 18016, 18017 and 18019 in detail. For this reason, it is recommended that a
detailed archaeological plan map of the site be prepared in addition to the subsurface testing
recommended above. Mapping will be conducted using tape and compass from known fixed
points found on the subject property. Site and feature locations will be plotted onto a base map
of the subject property for use during laboratory analyses and for presentation in the final data
recovery report. In addition, significant features will be individually sketch mapped using
compass and tape at a scale which will allow for the depiction of structures and the locations of
excavation units in the appropriate detail.
Photography
The remaining sites which have been recommended for Data Recovery (Sites 18003,
18007 - 18009,18012,18014 and 18018) include cattle walls, a twentieth century foundation, and
individual enclosures and modified outcrops. It is believed that excavations at site types such as
these would be of minimal scientific value for the purposes of Data Recovery. It is therefore
recommended that these sites be the subject of photographic recordation. Photographs of each
site and feature will be taken.' Photographs will be taken such that the current condition and
significant aspects of the sites will be represented.
Laboratory Procedures
All cultural materials recovered will be delivered to the ACP office located at 59 -624
2Pupukea Road, Hale`iwa, Hawaii, for laboratory analyses. Following the fieldwork phase of
investigations, laboratory analyses will cover a range of diagnostic endeavors. All faunal
remains will be identified to the species level, as possible, with the results being tabulated and
presented by provenience and weight. Marine shell remains will be similarly treated with the
samples being identified to the generic level, as possible. Artifacts will be sorted by type,
counted and measured with selected items photographed or illustrated and the results tabulated
for presentation by provenience. Datable samples recovered will be sent to Beta Analytic for
radiocarbon analysis with a maximum of 6 samples to be dated, to include AMS dating.
17
EXHIBIT B
Report Preparation
A complete Data Recovery report will be prepared detailing all fieldwork. This report
shall provide an in -depth discussion of the research questions posed in this plan. A review of
prior work on the subject property will be included. The report will provide complete
descriptions of the excavations undertaken including written accounts, placement of all
excavations on top plans drawn to scale, photographs and profiles depicting stratigraphic and/or
cultural deposits. Also included will be soil descriptions according to USDA standards and the
presentation of the results of all laboratory analyses described above.
Drafts of the Data Recovery report shall be submitted to the Department of Land and
Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR - SHPD). All recommended
content revisions shall then be made unless consultation meetings alter the recommended
revisions. Copies of approved, final versions shall be provided to the Honolulu and Big Island
offices of the DLNR -SHPD
All materials collected during test excavations will be bagged and labeled appropriately,
placed in labeled and inventoried boxes, and curated at the ACP office located at 59 -624
Pupukea Road, Haleiwa, Hawai`i.
18
EXHIBIT B
References Cited
Apple, Russell A.
1971 The Hawaiian Thatched House. National Park Service, Office of History and
Historic Architecture. U.S. Dept. of the Interior. San Francisco.
Armstrong, R.W.
1973 Atlas of Hawaii. Department of Geography, University of Hawaii.
University Press of Hawaii. Honolulu.
Borthwick, D.F., R. Chiogioji, B.L. Colin and H.H. Hammatt
1997 "Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 7 -Acre Parcel at Pahoehoe, Hawai`i (TMK
7 -7 -08: 20, 31, and 100)." Cultural Surveys Hawaii.
Handy, E.S. Craighill, and Elizabeth G. Handy
1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. B.P. Bishop
Museum Bulletin 233, Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Moore, James R., Michelle Elmore and Joseph Kennedy
2001 "An Archaeological Data Recovery Report (Stage 11) for the Proposed Malulani
Gardens Subdivision, Phase II, Located at TMK: 7 -5 -03:3 in Keopu 2 "d
Ahupua`a, North Kona District, Island of Hawai`i." DRAFT. ACP, Haleiwa.
Sato, H.H., W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, 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, In Cooperation with the University of
Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station. Government Printing Office,
Washington D.C..
Schilt, Rose
1984 Subsistence and Conflict in Kona, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology, B.P.
Bishop Museum. Honolulu.
19
EXHIBIT B