Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0764.000 2018-2020 Harry Kim Roy Takernoto Mayor Managing Director Barbara J.Kossow Deputy Managing Director Gunfv of Paival"t (offirr of f hr flavor 25 Aupuni Street,Suite 2603 * Hilo,Hawaii 96720 a (808)961-8211 Fax(808)961-6553 KONA: 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy.,Bldg.C * Kaitua-Kona,Hawai'i 96740 (808)323-4444 Fax(808)323-4440 January 29, 2020 Aaron S. Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council County of Hawaii t_n 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair Chung and Members: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Request: RS-15 to RA-5a Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC Tax Map Key: 5-9-001:008 As required by Chapter 7, See. 6-7.5 (a), Hawaii County Charter, transmitted herewith for the County Council's consideration and action are the Leeward Planning Commission's letter and enclosures regarding the above-referenced requests. Sincerely, HARRY KIM Mayor WouneilRTALodgeREZ19-239 Enclosures cc: Planning Department via Comm. No. Ref.To: County of Hawaii is an,Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. Ref.oamaR -4 ZQZQ J�tvOF Harry Kim G° 4' Keith F. Unger,Chair Mayor Nancy Carr Smith,Vice Chair • ;� Scott Church Wil Okabe �;:�; Perry Kealoha Managing Director Michael Vltousek Faith"Faye"Yates County of Hawaii LEEWARD PLANNING COMMISSION Aupuni Center . 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 • Hilo,Hawaii 96720 j Phone(808)961-8288 Fax(808)961-8742 { s IIA i Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair i and Members of the County Council County ofHawai`i 25 Aupuni Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Chair Chung and Council Members: SUBJECT: Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Request: RS-15 to RA-5a Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC Tax Map Key: 5-9-001:008 The Leeward Planning Commission,at its duly held public hearing on January 16,2020,recommended for your approval the proposed legislative bill for a Change of Zone from a Single-Family Residential- 15,000 square feet(RS-15)to Residential and Agricultural-5 acres(RA-5a)zoning district. The property is located on the makai(west) side of Akoni Pule Highway directly across from the entrance to Kohala Ranch at Kahua 1st,North Kohala, Hawaii. The Commission concurs with the following Planning Director's reasons for recommending favorable consideration of the request: The applicant is requesting a change of zone from Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet(RS-15) to Residential and Agricultural-5 acres (RA-5a). The applicant intends to subdivide the property into six(6) lots for the future development of a residential subdivision. There is no County sewer system in the area, so the owners will construct individual septic wastewater systems meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. Subdivision improvements are estimated to cost approximately $4,000,000. The property is a 37.88-acre rectangular parcel located approximately three(3)miles north of Kawaihae Harbor.The property reaches from the shoreline to approximately 160 feet above sea level(asl),makai(seaward)ofthe State-owned Akoni Pule Highway. The land surface of the project area has been previously disturbed by ranching activities and/or fires, and the existing vegetation is composed of almost Hawai Y County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 2 entirely two(2)non-native species:kiawe trees and buffiel grass.There are no existing structures, landscaping,and/or development on the project parcel other than existing trails and archeological features (i.e., walls, habitation sites). The Change of Zone request from Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet(RS- 15)to Residential Agriculture-5 acres(RA-5)conforms to,among others,the goals,policies and standards of the General Plan Economic and Land Use Elements. 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 proposed Change of Zone will conform to, among others, the goals, policies and standards of the Economic, Environmental and Land Use General Plan Elements: Economic: • Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical, social, and cultural environments of the island of Hawaii. • Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural, and social environment. Environmental• • Define the most desirable use of land within the County that achieves an ecological balance providing residents and visitors the quality of life and an environment in which the natural resources of the island are viable and sustainable. • Maintain and, if feasible, improve the existing environmental quality of the island. • Take positive action to further maintain the quality of the environment and incorporate environmental quality controls either as standards in appropriate ordinances or as conditions of approval. • Enact restrictive land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of wave action. Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 3 • Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. • Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. Land Use: • Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. • Provide opportunities for the public to fulfill recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. The requested change of zone conforms to the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map. 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 parcel is cut into three (3) different LUPAG designations. The mauka (landward)-northern portion of the parcel is within the Extensive Agriculture(ea)designation,the mauka-central and mauka-southern portion are within the Low Density Urban(Idu)designation, while the entire makai (seaward) portion is within the Open (o) designation. For the Idu designation overall residential density may be up to six(6)dwelling units per acre. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the property into six(6)lots is consistent with the low-density urban designation. This designation reflects the existing low-density residential development in this area which includes Kohala Ranch, the Kohala Kai Subdivision, and the Kohala by the Sea Subdivision located nearby.The area is primarily developed with low density residential neighborhoods,while to the north there are large expanses of open and undeveloped State lands.The proposed change of zone would complement the existing land uses in this area by restricting higher density development on a 40-acre coastal parcel and would keep with the low- density designation already well established in this area by designing lots of approximately 5 to 8 acres in size. The property is bounded by the Akoni Pule Highway and the Agricultural-5 acre(A-5a) zoned Kohala Ranch Subdivision to the east (created in the 1980's), the ocean to the west, undeveloped State lands to the north(also zoned A-5a), and the Kohala Kai subdivision to the south which is zoned A-5a. Staff notes that Special Management Area(SMA)Use Permit No. Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 4 2006-010 was approved to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision and related uses,and to make landscaping and other infrastructure improvements on the Kohala Kai property to the south. The proposed request will result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare.When considering any request to change the zoning district of a property,the Director shall consider the purpose of the existing and proposed zoning district and the purpose of the Zoning Code and shall recommend a change in zoning only where it would result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. The predominant land use in this area is Agricultural zoned 3-to 5-acre parcels(A-3a& A-5a) in the vicinity of the proposed project site that are developed mainly with residential dwellings and uses. If approved, the proposed residential project on a State Land Use Urban- designated parcel would be in keeping with County and State land use plans and will not detract from important open space area and recreational uses located along the shoreline and on adjacent parcels. For the purpose of promoting health, safety, and the general welfare of the County,the Zoning Code regulates and restricts the height, size of buildings, and other structures, the percentage of a building site that may be occupied, off-street parking, setbacks, size of yards, courts, and other open spaces, the density of population, and the location and use of buildings, structures,and land for trade, industry,residence,or other purposes.In considering the purposes of the Zoning Code in relation to the proposed request,the approval of the request will result in a higher density. If approved, the applicant could build a dwelling on each of the newly created lots,resulting in an increase in the overall unit density within the project site from one(1)home to six(6) homes. In order to ensure that there is sufficient land area to preserve the natural and environmental resources of the project site and to ensure that the region is not overwhelmed by additional residential density,the Planning Director recommends a condition prohibiting a second dwelling unit on each subdivided lot. In considering the request in relation to the surrounding zoning,the request will result in an appropriate land use pattern. The subject property is surrounded on two sides by existing residential subdivisions that are zoned for single-family residential use(i.e.,A-5a,A-3a)which will be similar to the proposed subdivision and will allow for the comparable density as the surrounding parcels. The proposed developments' covenants and restrictions on dwelling parameters will also aim to improve the general welfare of the residents in this area by promoting safe,secure, and maintained access to coastal sites. Based on the above information,the proposed request will result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience,and the general welfare of the County. Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 5 The proposed request will not burden public agencies to provide utilities and services to the subject property. Access to the subject parcel will be provided via two entrances from Akoni Pule Highway to the subject parcel. Considered cumulatively there will be a negligible effect on average daily traffic on Akoni Pule Highway,but a slightly more substantial effect with the interaction of left turns at the main entrance of Kohala Ranch. This will be mitigated by the proposed projects intersection improvements, which includes a northbound to westbound left-turn pocket and a southbound deceleration lane. As there is no municipal wastewater system in this area,wastewater will be disposed of by an individual wastewater system,meeting the requirements of the Department of Health.This will be done by the respective landowner in conjunction with the construction of a dwelling. The project will be served with underground water,electrical and telephone service from exiting lines located within a utility easement along Akoni Pule Highway. The majority of the subject parcel is located within an area designated as Flood Zone"X", or an "Area of Minimal Flood Hazard", with the remainder, or coastal portion located within Flood Zone "VE" or"Coastal areas with a I% or greater chance of flooding and an additional hazard associated with storm waves". As a condition of this recommended ordinance, all development generated runoff shall be disposed of onsite and not be directed toward any adjacent properties, or into the ocean. Moreover, all earthwork and grading shall comply with Hawaii County Code(HCC)Chapter 10,Erosion and Sediment Control and all development shall comply with HCC Chapter 27,Floodplain Management. All other essential utilities and services are or can be made available to the site. The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The property is located entirely within the County's Special Management Area(SMA)and an SMA Use Permit is being pursued for the proposed use. In view of the Hawaii i State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'A ina" decisions,the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing 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: As a result of the archeological studies conducted within the project area, forty (40) historic sites were identified. These include five (5) sites with burials evaluated as significant under criteria d and e,two(2)multi-feature trail sites as evaluated as significant under Criteria d and e,one(1)habitation/ceremonial site evaluated as significant under Criteria c, d, and e;two (2)habitation sites evaluated as Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 6 significant under Criteria c and d;and thirty(3 0)additional archeological sites evaluated as significant under Criterion d. Other potential cultural impacts that may result from the proposed project specifically relate to coastal access and use. A detailed cultural-historical background was prepared by Kepa Maly in 200 that included information relative to the general region knows as Kohala Waho'of which the subject parcel is a part.The study suggests that the archeological resources present on the property are best understood within the context of the larger cultural landscape ofKohala Waho.In 2006,Rechtman Consulting prepared a cultural impact assessment for a coastal property to the south,which shares a common history and previous land uses.A number of cultural practitioners were interviewed during the consultation and study process. It was concluded that if the archeological sites were treated in accordance with SHPD approved treatments plans,and access to and along the shoreline was in no way inhibited, there would be no cultural impacts due to the proposed development. • The valued cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: Thirty seven(3 7)of these archeological sites listed above are considered to be a valued cultural resource and retain the potential to be impacted by the proposed development. To that end, the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) will be requiring that a revised burial treatment plan, an archeological preservation plan and a data recovery plan be implemented prior to any ground disturbance. • Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: When the 2015 nine-lot subdivision was proposed, site treatments were reconsidered, and plans were made to revise the existing data recovery, preservation, and burial treatment plans. With the reduction of the proposal to six lots, within no development makai of the ala loa/jeep road, recommended treatments have been further revised, and future data recovery, preservation and burial treatment plans will be further updated.In conformance with the recommendations of the latest archeological inventory survey,the burial treatment plan will be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use.Additionally,the 2000 burial plan had noted that any subsequent change in the project's components could require the applicant return to the Hawaii Island Burial Council for review of proposed preservation measures. • Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: In addition to development and implementation of data recovery,preservation and burial treatment plans(which require final review and acceptance by SHPD),the project has involved continuing consultation with native Hawaiian individuals and organizations.Both plans will be implemented prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities.Throughout this process,native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. Aaron S.Y. Chung, Council Chair and Members of the County Council Page 7 Based on the above findings, approval of the Change of Zone request from Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet(RS-15)to Residential Agriculture-5 acres(RA-5a)would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-7(North&South Kohala District Zone Map) Article 8,Chapter 25(Zoning)of the Hawaii County Code is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. We are enclosing copies of the staff Background,Planning Director's Recommendation,the Power point presentation and a draft transcript of the hearing for your information to be provided under separate cover. Sincerely, Digitally signed by Keith Keith F. F.Unger Unger Date:2020.01.26 17:09:24-10'00' Keith F. Unger, Chairman Leeward Planning Commission LKohalashorelineREZI 9-2371pc2 Enclosures cc: Mr. Gregory R. Mooers, Mooers Enterprises, LLC Mr.Nathan P. Myhrvold, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Department of Public Works Department of Water Supply Ronald Kim,Esq., Corporation Counsel BKohaIaSHRLSubREZSMA.doc 12104119 COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT KOHALA SHORELINE LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 19-000237) SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (SMA 19-000073) KOHALA SHORELINE LLC has submitted applications for: 1) a Change of Zone from the Single-Family Residential (RS-15) to the Residential and Agricultural 5-Acres (RA-5a) zoning district for a 37.88-acre parcel of land; and 2) a Special Management Area(SMA) Use Permit for a six-lot subdivision for the future development of six (6) home sites. In July 1997, the Hawai'i County Council approved Ordinance No. 97-102 (REZ 866) which rezoned the entire 37.88-acre parcel from Agricultural 5-acres (A-5a) to Single-Family Residential 15,000 sq. ft. (RS-15). In August 1997, the Hawai'i County Planning Commission granted Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit No. 379 to allow for the development of a 50-lot subdivision on the subject parcel. Since that time the property ownership has changed, and the project (as permitted) was never developed. An attempt by the Hawai'i County Council to amend this application to change the zoning of the subject parcel to Residential and Agricultural 15-acres (RA-15a) was pursued, however the bill was vetoed, and as such the current RS-15 zoning designation has remained. The subject property is located mcakai (seaward) of Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270) approximately three (3) miles north of Kawaihae Harbor, North Kohala, Island of Hawai'i on TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008. PROPOSED ACTION 1. Applicant's Proposed Project: The applicant proposes to subdivide the property into six (6) lots which will vary in size from five (5) to eight (8) acres in preparation for the future development of six (6) single-family dwelling structures. Road access would be from two (2) permitted access locations along the highway, with lots provided with internal access and underground efectricity, telephone, and water service from existing lines along the highway. The future homes will utilize individual wastewater systems designed pursuant to State Health Department requirements and would exceed those requirements by installing aerobic treatment systems, which produce a higher quality effluent that can. be I utilized for irrigation. The proposed project includes a public parking area for mauka (landward) to makai (seaward) shoreline access; there will be continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. It is anticipated that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa, as well as an existing "jeep road", which meanders through the makai portion of the project area. The applicant states 3 that the project will adopt several design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to "environmental permits". Additionally, a strict set of Covenants, i Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) will require homeowners adhere to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) guidelines, such as the installation of Cyclic Biological Treatment (CBT) systems for wastewater and limiting the homes' 3 height to 25 feet maximum. The future home sites will be located on land with a 3 i moderate slope, all sited a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway, a minimum of 40 feet in elevation above mean sea-level (msl), and a minimum of 100-feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loaljeep road. 2. Applicant's Request: In order to implement the proposed project, the applicant is requesting the following permits/approvals: • Change of Zone from RS-15 to RA-5a for the entire 37.88-acre subject property. 3 The current Single-Family Residential zoning district of RS-15 allows for the development of a 50-lot subdivision. The owner has determined that a less dense development would be more in keeping with the surrounding zoning and land i uses. The proposed change of zone to Residential and Agricultural 5-acres (RA- 5a) would decrease potential density from 110 lots to six (6) lots, thus reducing i 3 the impacts associated with denser development. The scale of the lots would be similar to the A-3a and A-5a zoned lots located adjacent to the project site (e.g., Kohala Ranch). • Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit on the 37.88-acre subject property in order to subdivide the property into six (6) lots in preparation for the 3 3 7 future development of home sites. 3 I 2 I I 3. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the enclosed in support of the request: Planning Department Exhibit 1 - Change of Zone application, SMA Use Permit Application, and Final Environmental Assessment. 4. Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Ch. 343: The applicant submitted a draft I Environmental Assessment (DEA) report on the proposed project for publication in the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) bulletin, the Environmental Notice, on May 8, 2019. The applicant received comments from agencies and the public during that i 30-day notice period. The Planning Director agreed with the projects Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) once the applicant integrated agency and public comments into a final EA (FEA). The FEA-FONSI was published in the August 8, 2019 edition of the OEQC Environmental ATotice. 5. Landowner: Kohala Shoreline, LLC i BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND HISTORY OF PROPERTY 6. Change of Zone Ordinance No. 97-102 (REZ 866): Approval to rezone the subject I I parcel (37.88-acres) from Agricultural 5-acre (A-5a) to a Single-Family Residential (RS- 15) zoning district, with an effective date of July 14, 1997. 7. SMA Permit No. 379: A SMA permit to allow for the development of a 50-lot single- family residential subdivision and related improvements on the subject parcel was approved by the Planning Commission with an effective date of July 14, 1997. 3 8. Resolution No. 44-07: Resolved to temporarily delay Council action on rezoning I I applications in the District of North Kohala which permit transient lodging accommodations or which re-designate agricultural land into zoning districts with a minimum land area less than twenty (20) acres in size. 3 9. Planning Director Initiated Change of Zone (REZ-'07-067): According to Condition C of Change of Zone Ordinance No. 97-102: "Final Subdivision Approval of the proposed 1 residential subdivision within the subject property shall be secured from the Planning Director within five (5) years from the effective date of this ordinance". Additionally, Condition No. 4 of. SMA permit No. 379 required that Final Subdivision Approval be secured within 5 years (i.e., July 14, 2002)from the effective date of the permit. SMA. Use Permit No. 379 allowed the landowner the opportunity to file a time extension to j 3 Condition 4, but after 10 years no requests for time extension to the cited conditions was pursued. By letter dated May 31, 2007 it was noted that after 10 years of inaction by the landowner, the Planning Director initiated the rezoning of the property from a RS-15 to a Residential and Agriculture (RA-5a) zoning district. That attempt failed, and the property remained within the Single-Family Residential 15,000 sq. ft. (RS-15) zoning district. 10. County Council Initiated Change of Zone, Bill 237 (Draft 2): The Hawaii County Council passed the second and final reading of Bill 237, which proposed repealing Change of Zone Ordinance No. 97-102 and would change the zoning from RS-15 to RA- 15a; Bill 237 was vetoed by Mayor Harry Kim, and the Hawaii County Council failed to override the veto. SENATE CONCURRENT RSOLUTIONS 11. S.C.R. NO. 179: Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 179, H.D. 1, adopted in 1988, urges the retention of view and open space makai of Kawaihae-Mahukona-Hawi Road from Kawaihae to Upolu Point, Hawai'i. 12. S.C.R. NO. 146: Senate Concurrent Resolution No. 146, S.D. 1, adopted in 2001, urges the retention and preservation of open space and view planes, historic sites, and traditional access along the coastline of the North Kohala District, Hawai'i STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 13. State Land Use District: Urban. 14. General Plan LUPAG Map Designation: The subject parcel is cut into three (3) different LUPAG designations. The mauka-northern portion of the parcel is within the Extensive Agriculture (ea) designation, the mauka-central and mauka-southern portion are within the Low Density Urban (ldu) designation, while the entire makai portion is within the Open(o) designation. 15. County Zoning: The current zoning of the subject parcel is within the Single-Family Residential 15,000 square-feet (sq. ft.) (RS-15) zoning district, which is single-family residential zoning with a minimum land area of 15,000 sq. ft. for each dwelling unit. The RS district provides for low density residential use for urban and suburban family life. 16. North Kohala Community Development Plan (CDP): The North Kohala Community Development Plan (NKCDP) was adopted via Ordinance No. 08-151 by the Hawai'i 4 a County Council on November 5, 2008. Relevant "key planning implications" of the NKCDP include protecting Kohala's pristine coastline and abundance of marine life from 3 development and ensuring consistent mauka-makai shoreline access for residents. It should be noted that both "Access" and "Affordable Housing" were considered priority issues and goals for the NKCDP, and that "consideration of the cultural and environmental sensitivity of North Kohala shall be given to all proposed projects in the SAM areas, including single-family residences and all subdivisions". Coastal land preservation is also a priority management action for the North Kohala District as is preserving the view planes along the Akom-Pule Highway which runs adjacent to the subject project parcel. As part of the community recommended access trails noted in the NKCDP, Kahua I and Kahua 2 are "undesignated" (not formally recognized) trails located on/across the subject parcel which provide vehicular access on an existing jeep road to Big Bay. 17. Special Management Area (SMA): The entire project parcel is located along the shoreline and within the Special Management Area. The SMA are lands extending mauka from the shoreline as delineated on the maps filed with the Planning Commission as of June 8, 1977, or as amended pursuant to Section 9-23 of the Planning Commission Rules. In conjunction with this proposed rezoning, the applicant has submitted a Special Management Area Use Permit application for the proposed six-lot subdivision and associated development. DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA 18. Subject Property: The property is a 37.88-acre rectangular parcel located approximately three (3) miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. The property reaches from the shoreline to approximately 160 feet above sea level (asl), mak-bi of the State-owned Akom Pule Highway. The surface consists of a lava flow deposited more than 120,000 years B.P. with soils of the Kawaihae series dominating the landscape; these soils include very fine sandy loam with stony loam lenses. The substratum is weakly developed volcanic ash underlain by pahoehoe lava. It should be noted that the erosion potential for these soils is considered high. The land surface of the project area has been partially disturbed 5 previously by ranching activities and/or fires, and the existing vegetation is composed of almost entirely two (2) non-native species: kiawe trees and buffel grass. 19. Surrounding Zoning/Land Uses: The property is bounded by the Akoni Pule Highway and the Agricultural 5-acre (A-5a) zoned Kohala Ranch Subdivision to the east, the ocean to the west, undeveloped State lands to the north (also zoned A-5a), and the Kohala Kai subdivision to the south which is zoned A-5a. Staff notes that Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit No. 2006-010 was approved to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision and related uses, and to make landscaping and other infrastructure improvements on the Kohala Kai property to the south. 20. Coastal Hazards and Flood Zone: The Federal Emergency Management Agency's (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate map (FIRM) indicates that the majority of the property is in Flood Zone "X" which indicates areas of minimal flood hazard. A narrow portion of the shoreline along the property is within Flood Zone VE, indicating a coastal area with a 1% or greater chance of flooding and an additional hazard associated with,storm waves; there is a base flood elevation of 35-feet. The project area has no perennial freshwater bodies, but the property has five (5) gulches with ephemeral streams (i.e., a stream that flows only briefly during and following a period of rainfall in the immediate locality), however, only Keawewai Gulch is named. Four (4) single culvert and one (1) double culvert transmit storm runoff from mauka lands under Akoni Pule Highway across the subject property and into the gulches towards the shoreline. These deep gulches appear to not overtop their banks and represent only minimal flood hazard to the property. Consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS) indicates that Keawewai Gulch and one of the unnamed gulches are considered jurisdictional waters of the U.S., under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 21. Flora/Fauna Resources (Terrestrial): As typical for the region (i.e., historically ranched areas on leeward coasts) the subject property is covered with non-native vegetation which consists predominately of scattered kiawe with an understory of buffel grass. A total of 30 plant species were identified during the numerous terrestrial biological surveys completed for this site. Only four (4) common plants were observed, `uhaoa, the yellow flower `ilima, the succulent `akulikuli, and the strand vine Hi'iaka 6 i which are considered indigenous to the Hawaiian Islands. No threatened or endangered plants species were observed on the subject parcel, and no plant critical habitat is present on the property or within the vicinity of the project site. The mammalian fauna of the project area is comprised mainly of introduced species, including small Indian mongooses, feral cats, roof rats, Norway rats, European house mice, and possibly Polynesian rats. None of the species observed are of any conservation concerns, and all are deleterious either to the environment or to native species found in Hawaii. Almost all of the birds seen on the site were wide-ranging aliens such as common mynas, cardinals, ? finches, and zebra doves. Other than the common shorebird `ulili and kolea (which were observed at the shoreline) no indigenous avian species were identified during the survey. No critical habitat for terrestrial fauna is present-in the area, but some endangered species may overfly this and all other areas of the island, including the Hawaiian petrel and band- i rumped storm-petrel; however it is noted these species are known to nest at elevations well above 5,000 feet, nowhere near the project site. The only native Hawaiian land mammal, the Hawaiian hoary bat, may also occur in the area as it has been observed in almost all parts of the Island of Hawai'i. 22. Biota (Marine): Overall, the biotic composition of the coral reef communities conforms to the typical zonation pattern that is well documented for the West Hawai'i area. Most of the shoreline throughout the property is composed of wave cut vertical basaltic cliffs several meters high that extend below the waterline forming the "intertidal zone". The remaining areas of shoreline are composed of small beaches covered with boulders and rounded rocks. At these areas, the boulders continue through the nearshore area. Observations made indicate that the nearshore boulders are essentially devoid of macrobenthos, most likely due to the high energy environment of the nearshore area. In areas where boulders do not occur, the reef zone nearest to the shoreline consists of submerged basaltic spurs and outcrops that are colonized primarily by the branching coral species, Pocillopara meandr^ina. Beginning at approximately 35 feet from the shoreline cliffs, the bottom is-composed of a basalt platform that extends from the depths of about 15 feet to about 30 feet. The nearshore reef platform is nearly completely covered with growth of living corals. Communities of reef fish in this area are typical of West Hawai'i 7 species, with only a few observed large fish species. Excessive sedimentation was determined to be a concern for this area; however, studies indicate that the main culprit for excessive sedimentation is overgrazing by cattle, and ungulates on typically dry lands located mauka of the project parcel. When combined with non-native landscapes, sediment discharges to the ocean following periodic severe rainfall events can be substantial. The studies also indicate the vast majority of sediment found in gulches on the Kohala Shoreline property originates in the gulch drainage basins mauka of Akoni Pule Highway, not within the subject property. Regardless of the adaptability of coral communities to local sedimentation, there is a need to avoid any increase in the sedimentation coming from the subject property, and as such the project has been designed to include features to substantially reduce property-related sedimentation. 23. Historical/ Cultural Resources: A cultural impact assessment (CIA) report of the subject property was prepared by ASM Affiliates, Inc. for the proposed action. Extensive consultation with Native Hawaiian agencies, individuals, and organizations occurred throughout the research for a previous Draft EA in 2015. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs, a local Hawaiian Homelands group, and the Hawaiian Civic Club were consulted by letter; response letters did not indicate any specific resources or practices of concern. As part of the current CIA, project representatives met with the North Kohala Community Access Group who represent many of the Native Hawaiian community's concerns with respect to access rights. Concerns raised centered on the protection of trails, traditional sites, burial sites, as well as perpetuation of access to the property for traditional and customary practices to ensure traditional coastal activities will not be impacted. A site visit with community leaders and cultural practitioners in February 2019 was conducted to determine potential impacts of the development on cultural practices. Attendees were i encouraged by the overall limited space for future development, and that the extreme coastal portion of the project property would be preserved. The property owner is committed to continued consultation with any Kohala cultural community group with i respect to the long-term protection and care of the project sites cultural landscape. In 3 addition to natural resources that are important in cultural practice, the property supports burials and archeological features that have cultural significance. The applicant's agent 8 appeared before the Hawai'i Island Burial Council (HIBC) to conduct consultation with respect to the five (5) burial sites located within the development area. The existing Burial Treatment Plan (BTP) for the project area, which includes a 30-foot buffer around the sites, involved ensuring that appropriate access to the burial sites would be allowed. The BTP will be updated to include new buffer areas and any additional 3 3 protection/preservation strategies that may be required for this development. As part of the effort to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources, the physical resources of the subject property were assessed. In general, it was observed that no culturally important native vegetation, springs, trees, caves or pu'u are present on the property. Of critical importance is the value of the shoreline and its resources, and the I related use of access. Although the shoreline vegetation does not currently include the i quality and quantity of botanical resources that would be important for native gathering, the area makai of the calci loaljeep road is planned for gradual planting with native shoreline plants that could have cultural value — and could ultimately be used for native gathering practices. I i 24. Archeological Resources: An archeological inventory survey (AIS) report was prepared for the proposed development on the subject property; however, at least eight (8) archeological studies of the property have been conducted since 1985. Additional reviews include a data recovery plan, data recovery excavations, burial and site preservation plans, and other archeological studies for the subject property. Beginning in 2010, initial fieldwork Identified all of the 39 archeological sites previously recorded and refined site descriptions for five (5) of those sites. While not all the recorded sites were not i considered to be significant, they do represent parts of a relatively intact archeological landscape that documents evolving land uses froiy� the pre-contact times to the late i historic period. With the current development plan of a 6-lot subdivision with no proposed development located mcakcai of the ala loa/jeep road, recommended treatments I for sites has been further revised to require that all fixture data recovery, preservation, and i burial treatment plans need to be updated. The 2016 AIS recommended data recovery for 16 sites, plus portions of two (2) additional sites that contain preserved burial features. It is believed that these two (2) sites retain information that could be recovered and aid in i i 9 3 I 3 I I developing a specific chronology of land use history for the project area. Eleven (11) sites that have been previously approved for data recovery by SHPD will be reassigned a preservation treatment, reducing the total number of sites that will be subject to data recovery from eighteen (18) to seven (7) and increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen (16) to twenty-seven (27). SHPD approved the AIS for the project in 2016. The project archeologist contacted SHPD in 2018 with revised treatment recommendations based on the reduced development proposal. By letter dated June 3, 2019 the SHPD agreed to the revised mitigation commitment from data recovery to preservation for these sites. (Planning Department Exhibit 2—June 3, 2019 Letter) 25. Scenic Resources: The project has been designed to include restrictions in density, grading, tree removal, home height, and home site location to minimize impacts on protected scenic view planes, including views from Akoni Pule Highway to the coast. The project will contribute to the transformation of views of undeveloped coastal areas occurring in North Kohala, but the effect is not severe due in part to the remaining undeveloped coastal areas to the North, as well as the presence of a large development mauka and south of the project parcel. Hawai'i State Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR) No. 179, H.D. 1, adopted in 1988, urged the retention of view ad open space makai of Kawaihae-Mdhukona-HdW-i Road from Kawaihae to Upolu Point. Concern with view planes by the community forced integration of view plane protection strategies into the Hawai'i County General Plan and the North Kohala Community Development Plan. To that end, the owner proposes: 1) to have all homes set back from Akoni Pule Highway by a minimum of 150 feet, 2) all homes sited 100 feet from the shoreline mauka of the ala loaljeep road, and 3) all proposed structures will have a maximum height of 25 feet. Due to these proposed restrictive covenants the applicant states the project will maintain view corridors and scenic resources of this coastal area, including mauka-makai lateral views. 26. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise: According to the applicant, for subdivisions near the shoreline in leeward Hawai'i, key considerations are the potential for increased runoff from storms, increased fire risk from droughts, higher wind loads from more frequent hurricanes, and rising sea levels. Because of this the applicant is proposing to place all 10 } i t 3 i 3 house lots mauka of the ala loa/jeep road which constrains potential homes to areas higher than 40 feet asl, and generally above 50 feet asl. Increased gulch flow and runoff could also be a concern, and as such, all culverts within the subdivision would be 3 obligated by CC&R's to be oversized to accommodate the 100-year storm recurrence interval (RI), rather than the required 50-year RI in order to account for future increases to storm runoff amounts. i 3 27. Recreational Resources and Public Access: Site reconnaissance indicates that the property is lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers. Mauka to makai vehicular access is currently available on the State parcel adjacent to and north of the subject property. Mauka-makai and lateral shoreline pedestrian public access is available on the Kohala Kai subdivision, which is located south and adjacent to the subject property. There are a few lateral "spurs" of vehicular accesses across the subject 3 property, however, only a six (6) foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline is shown on the Land Court Map for the property. In this area, the planned 3 i development of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail (NHT) is a potential recreational 3 3 resource for Kohala. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the development of the Ala Kahakai NHT indicated the preferred alternative to the establishment of the trail would be based on the Ahupua'a Trail System in which multiple trail alignments are integral to land use and stewardship. On public lands, and where landowners wish it, the Ala Kahakai NHT could include inland portions of the ala loa (historic trail) that run lateral to the shoreline. Maps contained with the EIS are general; however, they clearly indicate a possible lateral trail passing through the subject property. Discussions with the National Park Service (NPS) and community members indicates that the ala loa would be the favored location of the Ala Kahakai NHT on the project parcel. The owner of the 3 subject property proposes that mauka-makai access to both the existing 6-foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline, and the future Ala Kahakai NHT be from a proposed 4-stall public access parking lot near the property boundary with the i Highway. The parking area, which would be open approximately from sunrise to sunset, would access a new $00-foot long, 10-foot wide mauka-makai pedestrian trail through 3 the project parcel. No direct vehicular access to the shoreline will be allowed, either by 11 3 i residents or the general public. Use of the area of the property for fishing, gathering, and I hiking would not be affected by the proposed development. The outdoor activities and public access experience will be accommodated by the wide setback of the proposed 3 development from the shoreline that would prevent development within the shoreline i setback area. 28. Traffic: According to the applicant the proposed six-lot subdivision project was analyzed to determine the number of peak hour trips. It was found that the proposed project would 3 generate far less than 50 peak hour trips, therefore no Traffic Impact Analysis Report i (TIAR) was required. Impacts to roadways were considered regarding the project's two (2) short interval roadways, which are confined to the portion of the property I immediately adjacent to the highway. Due to the low background traffic in this area, both intersections are proposed to be unsignalized but will include a northbound to westbound 3 3 left-turn "pocket" and a southbound deceleration lane. Given the low total number of peak hour trips generated by the project the applicant states that no adverse effects to local or regional traffic are expected. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 29. Access: Road access to the project parcel will be from two (2) permitted access locations along the Akom Pule highway (State Route 270); one opposite Kohala Ranch Road, and the other approximately 900-1200 feet to the south. The projects two (2) short interval roadways will be designed and constructed as two (2) gated, private residential streets 3 with minimum 50-foot rights-of-way (ROW) that include two (2) 10-foot wide paved lanes with a grassed or aggregate shoulder with a landscaped and gated entry area. Both 1 J access roadways will include dry swales to assist with stormwater flow reduction and management. 30. Water: Water will be provided to the project under an agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company through a 12-inch water line along Akoni Pule Highway fronting the project parcel. Storage in the Kohala Ranch Water system is provided by an existing 500,000-gallon storage reservoir located approximately 1,400 feet east of the subject property. The applicant states that the tank is sufficient to meet domestic and fire protection requirements for the project. Six (6)-inch water lines will be installed at two 12 i I i I (2) locations along Akoni Pule Highway to provide water for the proposed project's homes and fire hydrants. The capacity of the private system is adequate to accommodate the additional demand to serve the project's six lots, which is expected to be a maximum of 1,000 gallons per day. Additionally, restrictive covenants, placed on the development by the owner, will require homes utilize low-flow fixtures, roof run-off for irrigation, as well as low-water-use landscaping. 31. Wastewater: Since no municipal wastewater treatment service is available in Kohala, the proposed development will utilize individual wastewater treatment systems meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health. All six (6) residential structures will use systems such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment (CBT) system. Effluent will be disposed of in leach fields, and upon passage through the leach fields, the effluent would travel downward though unsaturated lava flows and to the existing basal groundwater to discharge along the property's shoreline. It should be noted that the removal of TN (Total Nitrogen; nitrate, nitrite, ammonia) and TP (Total Phosphorous; dissolved and organic phosphorus) from the effluent under these proposed conditions is estimated to be 70% and 90% respectively. The applicant states that these systems meet and exceed the requirements of the State DOH as well as reducing the level of residual nutrients in the groundwater system. 32. Solid Waste: Solid waste from the proposed development will be hauled by residents and/or collected and hauled by commercial disposal operators to the County's West Hawai'i Sanitary landfill in Puuanahulu, which has several decades of capacity. Based on the mitigation summary for the proposed project it was stated that the owner will prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval. 33. Utilities and Services: Electrical power would be supplied to the project area by Hawai'i Electric Light Company (HELCO) via its island-wide distribution network. In the project area the network utilizes overhead lines in a utility easement that runs parallel to and approximately 2,000 feet east (mauka) of Akoni Pule Highway. Telephone service is available from Hawaiian Telecom, also located in the nearby utility easement. Underground connections to those utilities will be established for the project along the 13 proposed access roadways, similar to those used in the Kohala Ranch and Kohala Estates subdivisions to the east and southeast. AGENCIES' COMMENTS 34. Department of Water Supply: (Planning Department Exhibit 3 — October 14, 2019 Memo) 35. Department of Public Works (Engineering): (Planning Department Exhibit 4 — October 16, 2109 Memo) 36. Department of Public Works (Building): (Planning Department Exhibit 5 —October 4, 2019 Memo) 37. Fire Department: (Planning Department Exhibit 6—October 29, 2019 Memo) 38. Department of Land and Natural Resources — Engineering Division: (Planning Department Exhibit 7—October 10, 2019 Memo) AGENCIES-NO COMMENT/CONCERN 39. Department of Environmental Management, Hawai'i County Police Department, State Office of Planning (CZM), Department of Land and Natural Resources (Land Division). AGENCIES - NO RESPONSES 40. Land Use Commission (LUC), State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) PUBLIC COMMENTS 41. As of this writing, the Planning Department has not received any written comments or objections from the general public or adjacent landowners on the subject application. 14 Post Office Box 1101. HERS Kainuela, Hawaii 96743 NTERPRISES LLC Phone (808) 880-1455 Fax (808) 880-1456 Land Use Alted"Y antes grnooets cr.hawaii.rr.corn j i K 0-nw- A L A SN -I-low_0` 1"t-L L I N L L C I E i i Kahuali`ili`i, North Kohala District, Hawaii Island, Hawaii Tax Map Key (3rd) 5-9-001:008 CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION Single-Family Residential-15,000 sf(RS-15) to Residential and Agricultural 5-acres (FA-5) a SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT Six-Lot Subdivision t. 0 C' September 2019 Panning Dept: Post Office Box 11 0 1. QaE�S Kainuela, Hawaii 96743 �,.�,� . ��� L� Phone (808) 880-1455 a Fax (808) 880-1456 Land Use.Alternatives gmooers@ha� vaii.rr.cocn September 9, 2019 Michael Yee, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii L 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 967420 J Re: Change of Zone Application: Single-Family Residential 15,000sf(RS-15) to Residential and Agricultural 5-acres (RA-5a) ( Special Management Area Use Permit: Six-Lot Subdivision Owners: Kohala Shoreline,LLC a Hawaii LLC Applicants: Manager,Kohala Shoreline,LLC a Delaware LLC Members: Nathan Myhrvold and Rosemarie Havranek Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii Tax Map Key: (3) 5-9-001:008 Dear Mr. Yee: f-- Kohala Shoreline, LLC a Hawaii LLC owns the subject property and Manager/Kohala Shoreline, LLC a Delaware LLC is the Manager of Kohala Shoreline, LLC. The Manager is authorized to conduct the business of Kohala Shoreline, LLC. Nathan Myhrvold and Rosemarie Havranek are the Members of the Manager and are authorized to conduct business for the Manager. Actions by the Manager must be authorized by both of its Members, and, thus, both members have signed the applications enclosed. A copy of relevant portions of the operating agreements for the LLCs are included for verification. L In July 1997, the County Council approved ordinance No. 97-102 which rezoned the 37.88 subject parcel from Agricultural 5-acres (A-5a) to Single-Family Residential 15,000sf (RS-15). In August 1997 The Hawaii County g Plannin Commission granted SMA Use Permit No. 379 to allow the development of a 50-lot subdivision and related improvements. The roe changed hands due to the death of the previous owner, and the project as envisioned and property rty g � permitted was never developed. There was an attempt in 2007-2008 by the Planning Director to rezone Lthe property back to its original A-5a designation. The County Council amended this application and changed the zoning to RA-15a. On October 13, 2008 Mayor Harry Kim vetoed this bill and the Council failed to override the veto. owners continued to work with land use professionals and The property has not been developed and the o community members to develop a concept that would address environmental and cultural concerns. �l i 3 Michael Yee September 9, 2019 Page Two Kohala Shoreline, LLC proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision makai of the Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270) on the parcel located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. The lots would vary in size from about 5 to 8 acres, with all building sites located mauka of the ala l©a (old coastal trail)/jeep road. A new Special Management Area Use Permit, voiding SMA No.379, and a change of zone are required. The property site is currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RS-15), which we propose to be modified to Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a) to permit larger lots and less dense development. Similar developments are located nearby at Kohala Ranch, Kohala Kai Subdivision and at Kohala by the Sea Subdivision. Road access would be from two permitted access locations along Akoni Pule Highway, although one of these locations is proposed to be relocated to avoid a gulch crossing. The lots would be provided with internal access and underground electricity, telephone and water service from existing j lines along the highway. The future homes would utilize individual wastewater systems designed pursuant to State Health Department requirements and would exceed those requirements by installing aerobic treatment systems, which produce a higher quality effluent that can be utilized for irrigation. The project proposes public parking and a mauka-makai shoreline access, as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. It is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa, which meanders through the makai third of the a property. To translate the owner's mission statement of sustainable development to practical measures, the project has adopted several design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to {' environmental permits. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design(LID) Guidelines. A botanical survey conducted on the property found no threatened or endangered plant species. Vegetation consists of introduced species, except for several common plants indigenous to Hawaii. Implementation of archaeological preservation, data recovery plans and burial treatment plans, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, will mitigate impacts to historic sites. Cultural impacts on traditional and customary gathering rights along the shoreline will be avoided by the large shoreline buffer area below the ala loa and public access provisions that will preserve the landscape and cultural uses of the shoreline area. The home sites would be located on land with a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees, a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway, a minimum of 40 feet in elevation above mean sea-level, and a minimum of 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loaJeep road. Covenants will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and will require a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. Due to these design features, low density/large lots and the sloping nature of the site, the project would have only minor visual impacts for drivers on Akoni Pule Highway looking toward the sea. The project is not expected to have a negative impact on coastal water resources, as it would be low-density, with homes utilizing advanced wastewater systems and separated from the ocean by the wide shoreline setback, with substantial measures to control sedimentation to be low current levels. t _ Michael Yee September 9, 2019 Page Three Kohala Shoreline, LLC, understands that the Hawaii County Planning Department, based on its review of the Draft Environmental Assessment previously submitted, comments on the Draft EA and responses to them, has determined that the proposed action,will not significantly alter the environment, as impacts will be minimal and has accordingly issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). Please refer to your letter dated July 24, 2019 to Scott Glenn. In consultation with your staff, they have requested the Change of Zone Application and Application for the Special Management Area Use Permit be consolidated into one application booklet, with the understanding that each application will be considered separately through their individual regulatory processes. The Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission will consider and make a determination on the SMA application and will make a recommendation on the Change of Zone application which will be forwarded to the Hawaii County Council for a determination. 7 Please find enclosed the original and twenty (20) copies of the application booklet which includes in part -- the executed Special Management Area Use Permit Application signature page, the executed Change of Zone Application and the executed Residential Rezoning Attachment. I have enclosed a check made payable to the County Director of Finance in the amount of $500 for the filing fee for the SMA application and another check in the amount of $650 for the Change of Zone Application. A list of neighbors within 300-feet of the perimeter of the property is included as required for notifications in accordance with Hawaii County Zoning Code Section 25-2-4. 1 have also enclosed a full-size (2' x 3') site plan for presentation purposes. We understand under Planning Department Rules an approved Chapter 343 Final Environmental Assessment is acceptable for the SMA application and the County Environmental Report section of the Change of Zone Application. There is a copy of the FEA along with all exhibits included in each ' application booklet. I note the Planning Director, due to the significant setback from the shoreline, has Py reviousl waived the requirement for a Shoreline Certification for this proposed project and request a confirmation that a Shoreline Certification is not required. a review of these We request that your department execute applications and make a favorable recommendation to the Planning Commission. Should you or your staff have any questions or require additional information,please contact me directly. I am an agent for the applicants/owners. Sincerely, Grego oers Nl�� President GRM:jy enclosures L i CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION j E i COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT ! (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT:ManagerlKohala Shoreline,LL APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: ZCf ADDRESS: c/o Nathan Myhrvold Z---7Z 3150-139t1i Avenue Southeast,Building 4 Bellevue,Washington 98005 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: Manager/Owner LIST PRINCIPALS INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS:Nathan P.Myhrvold,Member Rosemarie B.Havranek,Member PHONE:(Bus.)(425)467-2309 (Res.) (Fax) LANDOWNER(S):Kohala Shoreline,LLC LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): J,,ODATE: ' 2-511 ayby letter) LANDOWNER(S)ADDRESS: Same as Ab e REQUEST: Single-Family Residential 15,000sf(RS-15) To Residential-Agricultural 5-acres(RA-5a) (Existing zoning) (Proposed Zoning) TAX MAP KEY: (3)5-9-001:008 STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 59-485 Akoni Pule Highway SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 37.88 acres , AGENT: Gregory R.Mooers President -n Mooers Enterprises,LLC ADDRESS: ' P.O.Box 1101 Kamuela,Hawaii 96743 TELEPHONE: (Bus.)(808)880-1455 (Res.)(808)880-1454 (Fax) n 2 Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ✓ ORIGINAL: Gregory Mooers COPIES:Nathan P.Myhrvold �- See Instructions on Reverse Side)) j__ I, CHANGE OF ZONEAPPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT:ManagerlKohala Shoreline,LLC APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATES I1 ADDRESS: clo Nathan Myhrvold 3150-1391 Avenue Southeast,Building 4 Bellevue,Washington 98005 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: Manager/Owner LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS:Nathan P.Myhrvold,Member Rosemarie B.Havranek,Member PHONE:(Bus.)(425)467-2309 (Res.) (Fax) LANDOWNERS):Kohala Shoreline,LLC LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): DATE: (May be by letter) LANDOWNER(S)ADDRESS: Same as Above REQUEST: Single-Family Residential 15,000sf(RS-15) TO Residential-Agricultural 5-acres(RA-5a) (Existing zoning) (Proposed Zoning) TAX MAP KEY: (3)5-9-001:008 STREET ADDRESS OF PROPERTY: 59-485 Akoni Pule Highway SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S) TO BE REZONED: 37.88 acres AGENT: Gregory R.Mooers,President ADDRESS:Mooers Enterprises,LLC P.O.Box 1101 _D ( Kamuela,Hawaii 96743 I TELEPHONE: (Bus.)(808)880-1455 (Res.)(808)880-1454 (Fax) Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Gregory Mooers COPIES:Nathan P.Myhrvold i �- (See Instructions on Reverse Side) i i I ATTACHMENT ii 3 Residential Rezoning PLANNING DEPARTMENT COUNTY OF HAWAII 3 APPLICATION FOR CHANGE OF ZONE r I 3 l 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 ques7ion 3. a. How many acres of the requested area do you intend to subdivide? 37.88ac b. Into what lot sizes? 5+acre 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? 1 year d. Do you intend to build houses on the newly created lots? no LAIif yes, please answer the following questions: on how many of those lots? 1 At what approximate price range? House Lots Not for 3 Total sale i Approximately how long, after approval of the subdivision, would the first house be available for occupancy? NA i If you intend to subdivide, please submit a preliminary schematic subdivision plan together with your change of zone application form. r I i i 2. If you have no firm plans of subdividing the subject area, do you intend to: a. Sell or lease the land to someone who has firm plans b. Sell or lease the land to someone who has tentative plans? i 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. 7 3. Do You think that your request and your further plans for the land will alleviate the local housing situation? Yes J How? The proposed action will create 6 market Residential-Agricultural lots in the North Kohala district.. 4. Are there any buildings on the subject area? No If so, what kind? what do you intend to do with those buildings if your request is approved? }f I -2- I i 5. Is the subject land currently being used for any agricultural activity? No 3 If so, please list the kinds of products grown and on S- how many square feet or acres of land per product. tl!_�• I 3 6. To your knowledge, has there been any flooding and/or drainage problem on the subject area? Yes 3 If so, please describe the problem. i C� See the attached Final Environmental Assessment for an in-depth discussion of flooding issues. 7. Do you think that the roads leading to the subject area needs improvement? No If so, what kind? I 3 Is the road adequate for the proposed traffic volume or load? Yes 8. What sort of governmental assistance and/or improvements do you feel will be needed in the subject area when j developed? j yes No a. Schools X b. Roads X I C , Sewer X d. Drainage X e . police Protection X -3- r- 3 I Yes NQ f. Fire Protection x g Recreational Facilities X x h . Public Utilities I other For those checked "yes, " please elaborate what type or kinds of improvements and/or assistance are needed. Signature: A �J Addres 3150-1Av Bellevue WA 98005 Telephone: (4-1050)467-23 09 Date: �v 6337A/50A -4- P.D. 5/84 Yes N-Q f. Fire Protection X 9. Recreational Facilities X I h . Public Utilities X i 1 . other _ I For those checked "yes, " please elaborate what type or kinds of improvements and/or assistance are needed. �r I i i I i i Signature: �lYt Address: 3150-139"`Ave SE,Bellevue WA 98005 Telephone: (425)467-2309 Date: I J 1 I i 6337A/50A -4- P.D. 5/84 t SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING DEPARTMENT I (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT: Mana¢erlKohala Shoreline LLC i APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: -1 ��r�t�,� �- � � ...� �---- ADDRESS: c/o Nathan P Myhrvold -= 3150-139th Avenue Southeast,Building 4 Bellevue Washington 98005 i LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: Manager/Owner LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS:Nathan P. Myhrvold Member Rosemarie B. Havranek Member. PHONE:(Bus.) (425) 467-2309 (Res.) (Fax) LANDOWNER(S): Kohala Shoreline LLC f LANDOWNER SIGNATURE(S): DATE: 7 ! �� (May be by letter) 4 LANDOWNER(S)ADDRESS: c/o Nathan P Myhrvold _ 3150-139th Avenue Southeast Building 4 Bellevue Washington 98005 REQUEST: Chane of Zone from RS-15 to RA-5a and then create a 6-lot subdivision within the Special Management Area. TAX MAP KEY: (3) 5-9-001:008 ZONING: RS-15 to RA-5a SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S): 37.88 acres ; t t� AGENT: Grego R. Mooers President ADDRESS: Mooers Enterprises LLC P.O. Box 1101 Kamuela Hawaii 96743 TELEPHONE:(Bus.) (808) 880-1455 (Res.) (808) 880-1454 (Fax) Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Gregory R Mooers COPIES: Nathan P Myhrvold 3 3 i SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION 3 j' COUNTY OF HAWAII I PLANNING DEPARTMENT (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT: Mana er/Kohal rel' e L J 4 APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: -7 o2 - Ar ADDRESS: cl athan P. d 3150-13911'Avenue Southeast, Building 4 Bellevue, Washington 98005 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST IF NOT OWNER: Manager/Owner LIST PRINCIPAL(S) INCLUDING NAMES OF MAIN OFFICERS: Nathan P. Myhrvold,Member Rosemarie B. Havranek Member _- PHONE:(Bus.) (425) 467-2309 (Res.) (Fax) LANDOWNER(S): Kohala Shoreli LC je LANDOWNER SIGNATURE( DATE: 2-4- t a (May be by letter) LANDOWNER(S)ADD SS: clo N athan P. M hrvold 3150-139th Avenue Southeast, Building 4 Bellevue Washington 98005 REQUEST: Change of Zone from RS-15 to RA-5a and then create a 6-lot subdivision within the Special Management Area. i TAX MAP KEY:_ (3) 5-9-001:008 ZONING: RS-15 to RA-5a j i SIZE OF PROPERTY OR AFFECTED AREA(S): 37.88 acres I i AGENT: Gregory R. Mooers President ADDRESS: Mooers Enterprises LLC '' F'' P.O. Box 1101 Kamuela Hawaii 96743 ^' '1 F� TELEPHONE:(Bus.) (808) 880-1455 (Res.) (808) 880-1454 (Fax) Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. 3 ORIGINAL: Gregory R. Mooers COPIES: Nathan P. Myhrvold �_ I [This page intentionally left blank] �J I 'j I i "y I j I I I i t F_ t _ Kohala Shoreline, LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 15,000 S.F. (RS-15) TO RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL 3-ACRES -3a) OWNER: KOHALA SHORELINE, LLC APPLICANT: MANAGER/KOHALA SHORELINE, LLC f NATHAN MYRHVOLD, ROSEMARIE HAVRANEK MEMBERS TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 I I. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Kohala Shoreline, LLC proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision makai of the Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270)on a 37.88-acre parcel located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. The lots would vary in size from about 5 to 8 acres, with all building sites located mauka of the ala loa (old coastal trail)/jeep road. The property site is currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RS- 15), which would be modified to Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a)to permit larger lots and less dense development when residences are built. Similar developments are located nearby at Kohala Ranch, Kohala Kai Subdivision and at Kohala by the Sea Subdivision. Road access would be from two permitted access locations along the highway, although one of these locations is proposed to be i moved to avoid a gulch crossing. The lots would be provided with internal access and underground electricity, telephone and water service from existing lines along the highway. The future homes would utilize individual wastewater systems designed pursuant to State Health Department f - requirements and would exceed those requirements by installing aerobic treatment systems, which produce a higher quality effluent that can be utilized for irrigation. The project includes public �, 1 t . E t Kohala Shoreline, LLC parking and a mauka-makai shoreline access, as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the ' t . form of an existing easement near the shoreline. It is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa, which meanders through the makai third of the property. To t , translate the owner's mission statement of sustainable development to practical measures,the project has adopted several design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to E . environmental permits. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design(LID) Guidelines. A botanical survey conducted on the property found no threatened or endangered plant species. E Vegetation consists of introduced species, except for several common plants indigenous to Hawaii. j e � Implementation of archaeological preservation, data recovery plans and burial treatment plans, in �s consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, will mitigate impacts to historic sites. Cultural impacts on traditional and customary gathering rights f along the shoreline will be avoided by the large shoreline buffer area below the ala loa and public access provisions that will preserve the landscape and cultural uses of the shoreline area. In the 1 unlikely event that additional archaeological resources or human remains are encountered during future development activities, work in the immediate area of the discovery will be halted. rl The home sites would be located on land with a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees, a minimum t of 150 feet makai of the highway, a minimum of 40 feet in elevation, and a minimum of 100 feet from r the shoreline, mauka of the ala loaljeep road. Covenants will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and will require a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. Due to these design features, low density/large lots ti and the sloping nature of the site, the project would have only minor visual impacts for drivers on Akoni Pule Highway looking toward the sea. The project is not expected to have a negative impact on coastal water resources, as it would be low-density, with homes utilizing advanced wastewater systems and separated from the ocean by the wide shoreline setback, with substantial measures to control sedimentation to be low current levels. 2 Kohala Shoreline, LLC" The Hawaii County Planning Department,based on its review of the document and comments to the Draft EA and responses to them, has determined that the proposed action, will not significantly alter the environment, as impacts will be minimal, and that this agency has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact(FONSI). MITIGATION SUMMARY The following measures have been developed either as intrinsic to the design or as mitigation to avoid, reduce or offset adverse impacts, as discussed in the EA. They are expected to be required as part of conditions for various permit approvals and/or carried forward, as amended by regulators, as Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). They are summarized here for the convenience of regulators for future approvals and for final CC&R formulation. WILDFIRE MITIGATION 1. Vegetation at the edge of each building pad will be kept low to act as a fuel break in order to reduce the spread of fire on or off the property. 2. The shoulder of the entrance roads will be mowed to reduce fuel buildup, and no parking will v. be allowed on these roads in order to avoid ignition from catalytic converters. 3. The entrance roads will have fire hydrants to assist in fighting not only house fires but - wildfires, should they originate on or off the property. i I FLOODING, WATER QUALITY,AND CLIMATE CHANGE 1. All house pads would be set back from the shoreline at a minimum elevation of about 40 feet above sea level (and generally above 50 feet), outside the VE flood zone. 2. All six residences would be required to utilize advanced individual wastewater treatment units such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment(CBT) system. 3. Information concerning the tsunami and dam hazard zones and appropriate evacuation procedures will be provided to all lot purchasers and an evacuation pian will be developed and included. 4. A detailed drainage study of the development will be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Public Works, in conjunction with submittal of plans for subdivision -- 3 I i i Kohala Shoreline, LLC review. Drainage structures will be constructed to capture and retain the increase in rainfall runoff generated by the development. 5. All homes must be built to withstand Hurricane Category 2 force winds. 6. Any culverts within the subdivision that might be built will be oversized to accommodate the 100-year rather than 50-year storm. 7. In association with grading permits and an NPDES permit,the project engineer will complete a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) that will effectively manage storm water runoff through emplacement of appropriate best management practices (BMPs) 8. In addition, the project will adopt certain protocols for grading of the lots similar to those in the Recommended Construction Best Management Practices(BMPs) for Land Disturbance of Less Than One Acre that was approved by Board of Directors of the Kohala Ranch Community Association, on August 9, 2007. 9. The project engineer will also explore the use of "mini-sediment basins", as successfully implemented in the Kohala Estates subdivision, in order to achieve the goals of the SWPPP and the additional Recommended Construction Best Management Practices. 10. A variety of additional specific site design measures derived from U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) requirements, which are consistent with the State CZM Program's Low Impact Design(LID)Guidelines,will be implemented to specifically accomplish 1)limitation of site disturbance; 2) a less engineered approach to site grading; 3) maximization of percolation and minimization of runoff,including re-direction of roof runoff to storage or use areas; and 4) alternative approaches to slope retention/stabilization. - BIOLOGY 1. To minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the removal or trimming of woody plants taller than 15 feet will be prohibited from June 1 to September 15 each year. 2. To avoid the potential downing of seabirds by interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting will be permitted after dark between the months of April and October, and all permanent lighting will be shielded in conformance with Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai`i County Code I Chapter 9,Article 14). 4 Kohala Shoreline, LLC VISUAL IMPACT 1. Future homes on the lots will be located a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway and 100 feet mauka of the shoreline, mauka of the ala loaljeep road. 2. All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. 3. No ground disturbance or structures by the owner or lot owners will be allowed makai of the ala loa(old coastal trail). 4. The project will include gradual planting of native vines and herbs near the shoreline in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the public access area, but there will be no landscaping with trees or shrubs by the developer or property owners makai of the ala loa. 5. The height of homes will be restricted to 25 feet, and the color scheme for homes and outbuildings will utilize earth-tones. 6. Xerophytic landscaping will be installed along the development's two internal roadways and also on residents' lots. 7. Kiawe trees will be retained as practical, and all trees will be limited to a height of 35 feet, similar to the existing kiawe tree landscape, as large trees would be out of place in this xeric landscape and require inordinate amounts of irrigation water. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 1. During construction, drip pans will be placed beneath vehicles not in use in order to trap -" vehicle fluids, and any significant leaks or spills that occur will be promptly cleaned with disposal at an approved site. 2. Precautions would be undertaken by contractors in the context of the project construction Best i Management Practices for the appropriate response and remediation should any heretofore unknown hazardous, toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during construction of the project. - 5 3 ' v i Kohala Shoreline, LLC I r_ I PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION 1. The project includes a four-stall public parking area that would be open from a half-hour I before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset, which would access a new 800-foot long, 10-foot wide mauka-makai pedestrian trail. I 2. The continuous lateral shoreline easement near the shoreline will remain in place, but the development will also cooperate with the National Park Service and DLNR's Na Ala Hele Program so that these agencies may develop the ala loa as an additional lateral shoreline access that is expected to become part of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. CULTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. To avoid potential impacts to the cultural value of burial sites present on the property, a burial treatment pian will be prepared in compliance with HAR §13-300. 2. To avoid potential adverse impacts to the cultural value of the preservation sites, and to enhance the preservation, interpretive and cultural values of these sites, archaeological data recovery and preservation plans will be prepared and implemented. 3. Throughout plan development, native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES 1. The owner will make fair share contributions to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the subdivision with respect to parks and recreation, fire, police, solid waste disposal facilities, and roads. The owner will comply with the County's Affordable Housing Ordinance and thus contribute to affordable housing in the region_ 2. The owner will prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval. 3. The owner will make intersection improvements to be determined in consultation with the Department of Transportation. 6 LJ 3 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM i I . SUBJECT REQUEST Kohala Shoreline, LLC ("Kohala Shoreline" or "the owner") proposes to develop a 6-lot 3 subdivision (the project) within its 37.88-acre property at TMK (3) 5-9-001:008 at Kahuali'ili'i, North Kohala, County and State of Hawaii (the "property" or "subject property") located along Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270), approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor (Figures 1-4). The property is within the County's Special Management Area (SMA), and an SMA Use Permit application will be processed with the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission (Planning Commission). A change of zone application from the current Single-Family Residential (RS-15) zoning district to the Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a) zoning district will be concurrently processed through the Planning Commission and the County Council. The Mission Statement for the owner of the property expresses the intent to develop and utilize the property with a minimum of impact: Our mission is to set a new standard of stewardship for new, small-scale, coastal housing clusters for twenty first century Hawai`i. Hawai`i is blessed with pristine beauty and rich biodiversity. Traditionally, its people lived in harmony with the land and the sea, protecting the natural wonderments that make '- Hawaii such an extraordinary place. To this end, we will work to protect and preserve the sensitive natural landscapes and seascapes along the Hawaiian coastline. Furthermore, we will serve as good neighbors to the local communities, respecting their values and cultural traditions. We believe that the built environment must be mindful of its intrusion into, and its framing within, the natural environment. We will build an environmentally healthy house that minimizes its impacts to the earth and possesses an aesthetic beauty in balance with its natural surroundings. To lessen the negative climate impacts caused by conventional structures, we will use best practices in design for energy efficiency and functionality, and for low carbon production and natural resource consumption. Natural 7 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA materials such as wood and stone will be sustainably harvested, and all manufactured materials used will be environmentally sensitive. We will use construction methods that avoid or mitigate disruptions to the local ecology and wildlife, as well as to the archeological history of those who lived on this land before us. This mission is a commitment made by ourselves, and by our partners in design and construction. We will ask our future neighbors on the property to Join us in following this mission as well. To translate this mission statement to practical measures,the project will adopt several design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to environmental permits. CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) Guidelines (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006). While not all design guidelines are appropriate to any given site, one principle that connects all LID practices is sustainability: LID is defined as a more sustainable land development pattern than the conventional method currently used in most areas. It incorporates a suite of landscaping and design techniques known as "Better Site Design" that attempt to maintain the natural, pre-development hydrology of a site and the surrounding watershed. An important LID principle is the idea that stormwater is not merely a waste product to be disposed of, but rather that rainwater is a resource. LID also integrates a range of structural best management practices(BMPs)for road design and stormwater and wastewater management systems that minimize environmental impacts (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006: 1-2). These guidelines seek to prevent environmental impacts rather than having to mitigate for them; minimize the use of regional conveyance systems; preserve natural areas; reduce impact on watershed hydrology;utilize less complex,non-structural methods to lower cost and maintenance; and create a multifunctional landscape. Low Impact Design Guidelines design measures will be adopted in road design, home site locations, gulch buffers, general erosion and sedimentation control, re-direction of roof runoff to storage or use areas, wastewater treatment, and native landscaping. 8 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zane and SAIM Figure la. General Location Ma 7 > ghi } J! Subject ProperfY ,� plio f _ 1 Wer.�.�9,'Itr,✓ /.,,. 2 G. II � Cf J I Y 13A1'L'd'A. E'fl �_ � m ` �,Tl4TB9 rn,xe( x.-an ,..✓ � x91 xoom E, 194-11E. :.05—n-E, 1081—E, -,12000m E. z1.5+.00m E. zl Esnorc,E, :.231--E. 7tQ' 02 4 Z IOt ivSo.v"'I u")TO°O�Yry C'�D Natronel�Gro t'... t'.cn�dto Y Figure lb. 'TMK Iiia Ohala � an \ -A �M . w2 NL r ,/ tl� 1 ✓ `.� .i_7 Kaia.a �aPOOteKoha�a Kao Ac ° / F— A Subject Property 41/� Kcha a KaAccess North 9 Kohala Shoreline, LLC"Change®f Zone and SAIM Figs 7 21 Property Photos r ` 0 r �r r / /sr Y f i � i � � r d raj d r��✓ �� �d � � "' rrr �� I sir .e ., x. ,,.J�� 9�,. .�u ��� ,0✓F,ob(!, A. 1 �� s,&���,.�k.t ao Typical Landscape,with ala loalieep r®adxb/ HPAr/Students Invests afire/�Site Meteorology r,,rr i r i / �''✓/ �/�/, /�r/1%ri /�i�i, j�r op%��I�//Ii%i//pi//liil//ri/itis�l Jrrr r ' ✓/i r /j,' �,ki i�J /J�rl+���/��G�l/'��'f/;,%f "(�' ��%i�,f'���t l/�iJ'��y/ � ;%'�/���j�f/�jr�J�/l(�n/✓6�r�E✓r�if�lf�,✓rl�rr��, G � ri i` i I i I i L c, Shoreline 10 U3 L I w' Wa. LLJ 0r tPr w � �" �� LLJ iNfl ✓ e� sr / C7 LU .O ® 1..1 �al U" IL SX 2 U \ sJ,1 W':3 rr c I� w W l J) n LUJ (�I �) � �1 w 1 ;W LU fx z N>W {' i S 'I �'!r Q Iw— �r,f X w tvi \ �jl i m Df LU } ,, 1 I x=. i � I I .:1 i•rK, i m w w CL R s _j O w z o ui W w w ui ✓\ W 41 ObOil ' w > c7 c9 1, �. o 0, -�' .A, ,'z.� s, w x 1 ^S I ,4 YI x= VII pa,uagtl s14Bltl Iltl'suillo�4aB 618E 146ufitlo�® [This page intentionally left blank] �1 �l Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential, with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet (RS-15), under Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02. SMA Permit 379, which allowed for J development of a 50-lot subdivision, was issued for the property but is in technical default for failure to timely comply with certain conditions of approval. Table I provides a history of zoning LJ and SMA actions for the property. Upon reviewing the property and development options, the owner determined that a less dense development would be more in keeping with surrounding LI zoning and land uses and his Mission Statement. The owner is therefore proposing a change of F zone to Residential and Agricultural 5-acres(RA-5a),which would decrease potential density from Lj 1 110 lots on which residences would eventually be built down to six lots,ranging in size from about F7 5 to 8 acres, reducing the impacts associated with denser development. The scale of the lots and Li would be similar to the A-3a and A-5a zoned lots immediately upslope at Kohala Ranch and south at Kohala Kai. Road access would be from two locations along the highway, as shown in Figure 3. The project L has two existing permitted access points, one opposite Kohala Ranch Road and the other approximately 980 feet to the south. Because the southern third of the property is separated from the remainder by Keawewai Gulch, which, under the present access situation, would require construction of a bridge or large culvert,the plan calls for relocating the southern road access point approximately 300 feet further south. The project would be served with underground water, electrical, and telephone service from existing lines located within a utility easement along Akoni Pule Highway. For wastewater treatment and disposal, all six residences would be required by I L Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to utilize advanced individual wastewater treatment units such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment (CBT) system. These systems meet and exceed the requirements of the State Department of Health, reduce the level of residual nutrients, and also produce a higher quality effluent that can be utilized for irrigation, ftirther reducing the subsidy of nutrients to the groundwater. A number of design features combined with the natural landscape will help avoid visual impacts for motorists on the highway and those on the shoreline. CC&Rs that are proposed to be further codified within future change of zone and SMA approval conditions will require future homes on the lots to be located a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway and 100 feet mauka of the 12 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA shoreline,mauka of the ala loalj eep road. CC&Rs will also restrict the homes'height to 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and mandate a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. This land has a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees that will assist in obscuring the homes. Landscaping will be installed by the owner along the subdivision's entry gate area and two short entrance roadways, and by residents on their lots, subject to CC&Rs that would also require that trees be limited to a height of 35 feet, similar to the existing kiawe tree landscape. Large trees would be out of place in this xeric landscape and require inordinate amounts of irrigation water, which is not in keeping with the owner's sustainable mission statement. Note that the erosion and sedimentation measures that will be adopted as part of the CC&Rs would also require retaining kiawe trees to the maximum practicable degree. The project includes public parking and a mauka- makai shoreline access, as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. Based on the history of coordination with the National Park Service, it is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa, which meanders through the makai third of the property(see Figure 3). This will provide a critical public trail connection from trail segments that extend from the private lands in the Kawaihae area north to State lands in North Kohala.No homes or any other construction would be permitted makai of the ala loa. The project will also include gradual landscaping in selected areas near the shoreline intended to restore native herbs and vines in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the area. El 13 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SA14 Table 1. Chronological Summary of Land Use History of Property Since 1997 No. Date Action 1 July 14, Effective date for Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102,which rezoned 37.88 acres of 1997 land from Agricultural 5-acre(A-5a)-to a Single-Family Residential(RS-15)zoned district. 2 August 8, SMA Use Permit No.379 granted by the Planning Commission(PC)to allow the 1997 development of a 50-lot single family residential subdivision and related improvements LJ 3 May 31, Letter informing the applicant that the Planning Director(PD)will be initiating the 2007 rezoning of the property from a RS-15 to a Residential and Agricultural 5-acre(RA-5a) district and will initiate the revocation of SMA Use Permit No.379. LJ 4 June 5, Kohala LLC submitted a request for a 5-year time extension from July 14,2007 until July 2007 14,2012 to comply with Condition C(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102 and Condition No.4(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit No.379. 5 July 7, The PC Commission considered Kohala LLC's request for a 5-year extension for 2007 Condition No.4(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit No.379. A motion was made to approve the PD's denial recommendation,which did not pass. Additionally,the PC considered the PD-initiated request to revoke SMA 379. A motion was made to approve the PD's initiated revocation,which did not pass. The PC voted to continue the matters until August 31,2007. 6 August 31, Kohala LLC requested a continuance until the next PC hearing in October to allow time 2007 to review information received from the Planning Department. The next Kona meeting was held on December 12,2007. 7 December The PC voted to continue Kohala LLC's amendment request of Condition No.4(secure 12,2007 Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit 379 and the Planning Director's initiated request to revoke SMA Use Permit No.379 until March 20,2008 to allow both parties to submit proposed Findings of Fact,Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. 8 March 20, The PC voted to continue Kohala LLC's amendment request of Condition No.4(secure 2008 Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit 379 and the PD-initiated request to revoke SMA Use Permit No.379 until April 18,2008. 9 April 18, The PC considered the applicant's request for an amendment to Condition C(time to 2008 secure Final Subdivision Approval)of Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102. A motion to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council did not pass. Additionally, the PC considered the request for an amendment to Condition 4(time to secure Final Subdivision approval)of Special Management Area(SMA)Use Permit No.379,which Li allowed the development of a 50-lot single family residential subdivision. A motion to 7 deny the request did not pass. The applicant requested an opportunity for final reconsideration of this matter pursuant to PC Rule No.9-11 3 . 10 May 22, The PC Chairman deferred the reconsideration of the amendment request for Condition 2008 No.4 of SMA 379 and the PD-initiated revocation of SMA No.379 until the County Council decides on its initiation of rezoning the subject parcel from a Single-Family Ej Residential-15,000 square foot(RS-15)to a Residential and Agricultural-15 acre(RA- 15a)zoned district. 11 September The Hawaii County Council passed the second and final reading of Bill 237(Draft 2), 24,2008 which repealed Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102 and changed the zoning from RS- 15 to RA-15a. 12 October 13, Mayor Harry Kim vetoed Bill 237(Draft 2)stating his reasons and requested that the 2008 Council reconsider the RA-5a zoning. F1 13 November The Hawaii County Council failed to override the Mayor's veto. 7,2008 14 November The PC Chairman deferred the reconsideration of the amendment request for Condition 24,2008 No.4 of SMA 379 and the PD-initiated revocation of SMA 379 until such time that the rezoning of the property is decided upon by the County Council or by the August 2009 Leeward Planning Commission meeting,whichever occurs first. 14 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change ofZone and SAM III. CONFORMITY WITH STATE AND COUNTY PLANS: HAWAII STATE PLAN Adopted in 1978 and last revised in 1991 (Hawai'i Revised Statutes, Chapter 226, as amended), the Plan establishes a set of themes, goals, objectives and policies that are meant to guide the State's long-run growth and development activities. The three themes that express the basic purpose of the Hawaii State Plan are individual and family self-sufficiency, social and economic mobility and community or social well-being. The proposed project would promote these goals F1 by adding housing and a location for an important coastal recreational trail for the North Kohala district,thereby enhancing quality-of-life and community and social well-being. HAWAII STATE LAND USE LAW All land in the State of Hawaii is classified into one of four land use categories—Urban, Rural, Agricultural,or Conservation—by the State Land Use Commission,pursuant to Chapter 205,HRS. The property is in the State Land Use Urban District. The proposed use is consistent with intended Cl uses for this land use district. U Figure 11 depicts the high-level land use designations for three types: State Land Use District, County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map (LUPAG), and County Zoning Districts. Only the high-level categories are designated with letter codes on the map:U for Urban, A for Agricultural, C for Conservation, 0 for Open and R for Rural. Although the meanings of these terms across designation types are not identical,the purpose of the map is to show the extent of urban versus other types in the region. F 15 Ll ohala Shoreline, LLC Change ofZone and SMA Figure 1l Regional Land Use Designations State Land Use Districts A Property U N U Land Use Pattern Allocation Beside Map A ru Property t 5/ �h \\\ f 0 U A Property / w r 16 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM Figure 12 Zoning Map � r r � r r r i a r r , v . v r i'li fDji�rrr �/ r /i % r r i r 1 + " t r :r 1 I 0 w , 17 ohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM HAWAII COUNTY ZONING AND GENERAL PLAN Hawai`i County Zoning. The entire property (Figure 12) carries a zoning designation of ISS-15 (single-family residential, with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet). The proposed action would reduce the allowed density to an average of one home per six acres. The awai`i County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (L AG). The LUPAG map component of the General Plan is a graphic representation of the Plan's goals, policies, and standards as well as of the physical relationship between land uses. It also establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the planned public and cultural facilities,public utilities and safety features, and transportation corridors. The property is classified as Low Density Urban, Extensive Agriculture, and Open in the LUPAG (Figure 13). Most of the property is designated Low Density Urban, with a small portion designated Extensive Agriculture, and a strip of Open along the shore. The proposed six-lot subdivision would be consistent with the Low-Density Urban designation, which allows "residential, with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses; overall residential density may be up to six units per acre." The shoreline area would remain undeveloped and dedicated to public access and consistent with Open under the proposed site plan (see Figure 3). The General Plan for the County of Hawaii is a policy document expressing the broad goals and policies for the long-range development of the Island of Hawaii. The plan was adopted by ordinance in 1989 and revised in 2005 (Hawai`i County Planning Department). The General Plan itself is organized into thirteen elements, with policies, objectives, standards, and principles for each. There are also discussions of the specific applicability of each element to the nine judicial districts comprising the County of Hawaii. Analysis for the EA confirms that it generally satisfies the following Goal and Policies, and Courses of Action of particular chapters of the General Plan; ECONOMIC GOALS Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life through economic development that enhances the County's natural and social environments. 18 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIM Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical, social, and cultural environments of the island of Hawaii. Strive for diversityand stability m the economics stem. Y Y Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural and social environment. Discussion: The proposed action is in balance with the natural, cultural and social environment of the County, and it will create temporary construction jobs for local residents and indirectly benefit the economy through construction industry purchases from local suppliers. A multiplier effect takes place when these employees spend their income for food, housing, and other living expenses in the retail sector of the economy. Such activities are in keeping with the overall economic development of the island. i 19 i._ Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Figure 13 LUPAG Map rr Fr, 44 r r s i i f,r J r � r ;r I e i f,. �r � f p f J 20 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM1 ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY GOALS Define the most desirable use of land within the County that achieves an ecological balance providing residents and visitors the quality of life and an environment in which the natural resources of the island are viable and sustainable. Maintain and, if feasible, improve the existing environmental quality of the island. { ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICIES Take positive action to further maintain the quality of the environment. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS Pollution shall be prevented, abated, and controlled at levels that will protect and preserve the public health and well being,through the enforcement of appropriate Federal, State and County standards. Incorporate environmental quality controls either as standards in appropriate ordinances or as conditions of approval. Discussion: The proposed action, which occurs in an area designated by zoning for urban development, would not have a substantial adverse effect on the environment and would not diminish the valuable natural resources of the region. The project will obtain permits and follow the conditions designed to reduce or eliminate pollution and environmental degradation. HISTORIC SITES GOALS Protect, restore, and enhance the sites, buildings, and objects of significant historical and cultural importance to Hawaii. Appropriate access to significant historic sites, buildings, and objects of public interest should be made available. 21 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM HISTORIC SITES POLICIES gencies and organizations, either public or private,pursuing knowledge about historic sites should keep the public apprised of projects. Require both public and private developers of land to provide historical and archaeological surveys and cultural assessments, where appropriate, prior to the clearing or development of land when there are indications that the land under consideration has historical significance. Public access to significant historic sites and objects shall be acquired, where appropriate. Discussion: Archaeological resources have been properly assessed through an inventory survey approved by SFIPD. Certain sites will be subject to data recovery and preservation, and plans will be developed and approved by SFIPD. Appropriate access to significant historic sites will occur through burial treatment plans, preservation plans, and trails. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE GOALS Conserve scenic and natural resources. Protect human life. Prevent damage to man-made improvements. Control pollution. Prevent damage from inundation. Reduce surface water and sediment runoff 22 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SM,4 FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE POLICIES Enact restrictive land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of wave action. Only uses that cannot be located elsewhere due to public necessity and character, such as maritime activities and the necessary public facilities and utilities, shall be allowed in these areas. Development-generated runoff shall be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Department of Public Works in compliance with all State and Federal laws. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STANDARDS } Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 27,"Flood Control,"of the Hawaii County Code. Applicable standards and regulations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 10, "Erosion and Sedimentation Control" of the Hawaii County Code. Applicable standards and regulations of the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts. i Discussion: Most of the property lies within Zone X, areas of minimal flood hazard. No home development will occur within the VE zone adjacent to the coast or within gulches. All standards regarding drainage,flooding and sedimentation will be adhered to and project design will be reviewed by and subject to permits from the Hawaii County Department of Public Works and the Hawaii State Department of Health. 23 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and S NATURAL BEAUTY GOALS Protect, preserve and enhance the quality of areas endowed with natural beauty, including the quality of coastal scenic resources. Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. Maximize opportunities for present and future generations to appreciate and enjoy natural and scenic beauty, NATURAL BEAUTY POLICIES Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. Protect the views of areas endowed with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of proposed construction during all land use reviews. Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty. Discussion: The site plan for the project, which will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, maintains mauka-makai view corridors and has all structures set back a minimum of 150 feet from Akoni Pule Highway and 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road. All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. The Waiaka`ilio Bay area is named in the 2005 General Plan as a place of natural beauty and was also so listed in the 1989 General Plan. The subsequent granting of the RS-15 zoning and SMA Permit indicates that the proposed urban land use for the property was considered compatible with this natural beauty designation. As discussed in Section 3.1.4,the point at Waiaka`ilio Bay will continue to be visible from the highway, albeit with a mid-ground that includes some developed structures. CC&Rs will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25, Hawaii County Zoning Code and will require a color scheme featuring earth-tone colors to minimize visual impacts, as generally shown in the visual simulations. Although the homes will be visible, their visual impact has been minimized, and they will not appear out of character given the 24 i 1 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIS large residential-agricultural development directly adjacent to the property, and the urban appearance of coastal developments just to the south and in Kawaiae. i NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES GOALS f, Protect and conserve the natural resources of the County of Hawaii from undue exploitation, encroachment and damage. i i Provide opportunities for the public to fulfill recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. a Protect and promote the prudent use of Hawaii's unique, fragile, and significant environmental and natural resources. I Ensure that alterations to existing landforms and vegetation,except crops, 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 earthquake. NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES POLICIES The County of Hawaii should require users of natural resources to conduct their activities in a manner that avoids or minimizes adverse effects on the environment. Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. Discussion: The proposed action would locate all homes a minimum of 100 feet from the shoreline and a minimum of 40 feet above sea level. Impacts to existing natural landforms and vegetation will be mitigated through permit-regulated Best Management Practices in conformance with Low Impact Design guidelines to avoid any impacts related to flooding, landslides, sedimentation or other similar impacts. 1 25 i Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM LAND USE GOALS Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. LAND USE POLICIES Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community, region and County. LAND USE, OPEN SPACE GOALS Provide and protect open space for the social, environmental, and economic well-being of the County of Hawaii and its residents. Protect designated natural areas. LAND USE, OPEN SPACE POLICIES Open space shall reflect and be in keeping with the goals, policies, and standards set forth in the other elements of the General Plan. Discussion: The proposed residential project on an urban-designated parcel would be in l keeping with County and State land use plans and does not detract from important open space. HOUSING GOALS Attain safe, sanitary, and livable housing for the residents of the County of Hawaii. Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County. k Maintain a housing supply that allows a variety of choices. Create viable communities with affordable housing and suitable living environments. 26 i , Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM � Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing inventory. Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee-simple housing in the County r_! in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. j i Ensure that housing is available to all persons regardless of age, sex, marital status, { I ethnic background, and income. l_ Make affordable housing available in reasonable proximity to employment centers. Encourage and expand home ownership opportunities for residents. HOUSING POLICIES j Work with, encourage and support private sector efforts in the provision of affordable I I housing. 1 i Encourage the development of affordable retirement communities. 1 Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. Discussion, The proposed residential project on an urban-designated parcel would provide housing that would be part of the choices for current and future residents, encourage use of currently urban-zoned areas instead of agriculturally zoned areas, and provide a contribution to affordable housing. There would be no conflict with County housing goals or policies. 27 r Kohala Shoreline, LLC`'Change of Zone and S CHAPTER 205A AND SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA Special (Management 4rpea. The property is situated within the County's Special Management Area (SMA) and an SMA Use Permit is being applied for before the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission as part of this application. The criteria for review of development within the Special Management Area are stated in HISS, Chapter 205a-26(2) (Special Management Area guidelines) and Rule 9-11(E) in the Planning Commission Rules. Planning Commission Rule 9- 11(E) states that the Authority may permit the proposed development only upon finding that, 1. The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect except as such adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and is clearly outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest; 2. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies and the Special Management Area guidelines as provided by Chapter 205A, S; and 3. The development is consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Code and other applicable ordinances. 4. The development will, to the extent feasible, reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist, including specific factual findings regarding: a. The identity and scope of valued cultural, historical or natural resources in the petition area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the petition area; b. The extent to which those resources, including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights,will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and C. The feasible action, if any, to be taken by the Authority to reasonably protect any valued cultural, historical or natural resources, including any existing traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights. Based on the resources and impacts described in previous sections, the project is consistent with the above criteria, a subject which will be evaluated and discussed in detail as part of the SMA application. 28 f. I Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAL4 �. There is a potential that some houses in the Project could be larger than 7,500 square feet in size. Per Hawaii County SMA Rules, any proposal for a house greater than 7,500 feet must undertake an SMA Major Use Permit with the Planning Commission. i NORTH ALA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN The North Kohala Community Development Plan encompasses the judicial district of North Kohala and was developed under the framework of the February 2005 County of Hawaii General 1 Plan. Community Development Plans are intended to translate broad General Plan Goals,Policies, and Standards into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around 1 the County. CDPs are also intended to serve as a forum for community input into land-use, delivery of government services and any other matters relating to the planning area. The General j Plan now requires that a Community Development Plan shall be adopted by the County Council a as an "ordinance," giving the CDP the force of law. This contrasts with plans created over past years, adopted by "resolution"that served only as guidelines or reference documents to decision- makers. In November 2008, the North Kohala CDP was adopted by the County Council. The version referenced is this Environmental Assessment is at: http://www.hcre.info/community-planning/community-development-plans/north-kohala. i The purposes of the North Kohala CDP are to: ` 1 • Articulate North ohala's residents' Vision and Values for their Community i ® Identify North Kohala's residents' Priority Issues to be addressed by the CDP • Develop Strategies and Action Programs to address those Priority Issues i The CDP, with a theme of "Keep Kohala, Kohala," describes the district as a "Cultural and Historical Preservation Community" and emphasizes that all development decisions "shall be required to assess and disclose their potential impact on cultural sites and resources within the district and shall be in keeping with the heritage and culture of North Kohala." The overall goal of the North Kohala CDP is: 29 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM "To manage the fixture growth of the district in a manner that is consistent with the Kohala lifestyle and ideals of being a rural community with a strong cultural heritage, an agricultural base, and a small town feel." f That overall goal is expressed through four Priority Issues, each with its own Goal. The Kohala Shoreline, LLC project is compatible with Priority Issue 1 and its Goal - Growth Management. Under the CDP growth is to be directed"to areas within and near existing town centers in order to preserve the district's open space and cultural resources; and to promote agriculture." The area proposed for the project is bounded on the mauka side by similar rural-residential and agricultural-residential developments, which are also present in many areas makai of the highway from the subject property towards the south. This is also in keeping with CDP Section 3.3, which calls for upscale developments to be limited to areas where they are already located, as depicted in the CDP's "North Kohala Environmental & Cultural Concept Map" located on Page 25. The property is located within the area depicted as "Existing Upscale Development" on this map. Another relevant consideration from the North Kohala CDP is the protection of viewplanes and places of natural beauty. "Strategy 1.9: Establish a View Plane Protection Program to identify and protect areas of significant beauty along the Kohala Mountain Road and Akoni-Pule Highway corridor." The project will have all homes set back 150 feet from Akoni Pule Highway and 100 feet from the shoreline,mauka of the ala loaljeep road.Buildings will be limited to 25 feet in height as measured under the Zoning Code and restricted to earth-tone color schemes to minimize visual impacts. The natural kiawe tree landscape will be largely preserved. These factors will protect view plans. The development of Kohala Shoreline, LLC will help implement Strategy 2.5, which aims to "Encourage and increase cooperation and coordination between the community and private land owners regarding public access to coastal and mauka lands." The proposed shoreline access and 30 f Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and VSAM parking area and lateral shoreline trail will help maintain and improve public access to coastal lands. i The North Kohala CommunityDevelopment Plan Strategy 2.6 identified vehicular access on an P gY existing jeep road over the subject property, TMK 5-9-001:008, to Waiaa`ilio Bay as part of the coastline trail and drivable mauka-makai access element. r The owner understands the desire for vehicular access across his property as part of this element, but it has foregone any such access for even itself and future buyers out of respect for input provided during community and native Hawaiian consultation, which strongly opposed crossing the ala loa with driveways. No development of any kind is to be allowed makai of the ala loa/jeep road under the plan proposed by the owner. It should be noted that this is one of the steepest parts of the property and would require extensive cut and fill to develop a road dedicable to the County of Hawaii. A parking lot with these impacts near the shoreline would be incompatible with the low-impact nature of the subdivision and unlike shoreline access for all other developments in the area, which for access provide a parking lot coupled with a trail of several hundred yards to the ocean, open sunrise to sunset access. The North Kohala Community Plan Goal 4.1, Growth Management,is to direct growth to "protect Kohala' rural character". The project furthers this goal by reducing the high-density development allowed by the current zoning and developing a rural project more in keeping with the Kohala community's desire to protect the rural character of the District. 31 i Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM IV. PHYSICAL CHARACTERISTICS AND ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING OF THE PROPERTY AND SURROUNDING AREA ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The Kohala Shoreline, LLC property is referred to throughout this EA as the property. The term project area is used to describe the general environs in this area of Kohala. The property is a 37.88-acre parcel in the State Land Use Urban District, located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. It reaches from the shoreline to approximately 160 feet above sea level, makai of the State-owned Akoni Pule Highway (see Figures 1-3). Adjacent land use is primarily rural residential and agricultural lots, with scattered undeveloped properties. The surface of the project area has been partially disturbed previously by ranching and fire, and the vegetation is composed of almost entirely of two non-native species, kiawe trees and buffet grass. The property is bounded by Akoni Pule Highway and Kohala Ranch subdivision to the east, the sea to the west, undeveloped State land to the north, and the Kohala Kai subdivision to the south. GEOLOGY, SOILS AND NATURAL HAZARDS Geologically, the property is located on the flanks of Kohala Volcano. The surface consists of a lava flow that erupted more than 120,000 years before the present(Wolfe and Morris 1996). The property soil is classified by the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly Soil Conservation Service) as Kawaihae very rocky, very fine sandy loam (KOC). The KOC soil is typically found up to 2 inches thick, underlain by up to 31 inches of stony loam, on slopes of 6 to 12 percent. This pH neutral soil typically contains up to 30% rock outcroppings. Permeability and erosion hazard are moderate, and runoff is medium. The capability subclass for KOC is VIIS, which denotes soils with very severe limitations that make them very unsuited for cultivation and restrict their use to mainly pasture and woodland (U.S. Soil Conservation Service 1973). It is unclassified in the Agricultural Lands of Importance in the State of Hawaii maps, and the Land Study Bureau classifies the land as E or "Very Poor." Both ratings indicate the land's poor agricultural potential. 32 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMS [ _! The Island of flawai`i experiences high seismic activity and is at risk from major earthquake damage (USGS 2000), especially to structures that are poorly designed or built. On October 15, 2006, two damaging earthquakes of magnitude 6.7 and 6.0 struck the west side of Hawaii Island, causing extensive damage in West Hawaii. An even stronger magnitude 6.9 quake occurred under Kilauea Volcano on May 3, 2018. None of these earthquakes caused more than minimal damage to the property. Volcanic hazard as assessed by the U.S. Geological Survey at the property is Zone 9, on a scale of ascending risk from 9 to 1 (Heli er 1990:23). The low hazard risk is based on the fact that Koala Volcano,the oldest volcano on the island,has not erupted for 60,000 years and is possibly extinct. The property does not appear to be subject to subsidence, landslides or other forms of mass wasting. Wildfire is an important concern in this part of North Koala, which has burned on several occasions owing to arson, car exhaust, campfires and firecrackers, among other causes. Fires started on this property may harm not only the owner's property but nearby land as well,including Kohala Ranch and State lands immediately adjacent to the north. Impacts and Mitigation Measures In general, soil and geologic conditions impose no constraints, and the proposed use is reasonable. Appropriate seismic standards would be adhered to during construction,per building codes. Vegetation at the edge of each building pad will be kept low to act as a fuelbreak to reduce the spread of fire on or off the property. Entrance road shoulders will be mowed to reduce fuel buildup, and no parking will be allowed on these roads in order to avoid ignition from catalytic converters. Finally, the entrance roads will have fire hydrants to assist in fighting not only house fires but wildfires, should they originate on or off the property. Water service will be provided to each lot for potable and irrigation uses, and irrigated vegetation will have less potential to ignite or spread fires. CLIMATE,DRAINAGE AND FLOOD HAZARDS The climate in the project area is mild and arid,with a mean annual rainfall of about 10 inches and a mean annual temperature of 75 degrees(Giambelluca et al 2014;U.H.Hilo-Geography 1998:57). 33 Kohala,shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM Maps of wind energy potential produced by Hawaiian Electric indicate that this area ofKohala has average wind speeds of less than 12 mph 20 mph at 50 meters in height ( ttps:// .hawaiianelectric.com/documents/clean energy_hawaii/renewa le_energy_sources/ '- hawaii_co ty hawaii_island SPI)_50m_19july_04.pdf) As discussed in detail below in this section, the world's climate is changing and requires consideration in any development. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance bate leap(FIRM) 1551660128C (9/16/1988) indicates that the majority of the property is in Flood Zone X, areas of minimal flood hazard (Figure 5a). A narrow portion of the shoreline along the property is in Flood Zone VE, indicating the 100-year flood coastal, high-hazard floodplain, incorporating storm surge inundation. The base flood elevation is 35 feet. No home development is planned within this area, which is well below the minimum elevation of approximately 40 feet for all proposed home sites. The project area has no perennial freshwater bodies, but the property has five gulches with ephemeral streams. Only Keawewai Gulch is named. Four single culverts and one double culvert carry storm runoff from mauka lands under Akoni Pule Highway across the property and into the normally dry gulches towards the shoreline. These deep gulches do not overflow their banks, represent only minimal flood hazard, and are not mapped on the F s. Preliminary consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS) indicates that Keawewai Gulch and one of the unnamed gulches are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any work resulting in the discharge and/or placement of fill within a jurisdictional water requires a Section 404 permit. Permitting is treated in the impacts discussion in this section. 34 Kohala,shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM Figure 5a. Flood Insurance Rate Map 4 ar , e �' �5 aF � hooia , a r; 4 rf' y1 Flood Hazard Assessment Report v✓vvw.h.Yw,,nini SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS(SFHAsj SUBJECT TO INUNDATION BY s t r i1 1C THE196 ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD -Th.1%annual chance flood(100- 2 f„j1,y year),also knew,as the base flood is the Bond that has a 1%than-of •..__ r' bemn equaled ar exceeded in any given year.SFHA.include Zone A,AE, s` •"_„sr=�'” AN,AO,V,and VE The Base Flood Elevation(BEE)is the water surface elevation of the 1%annual chance flood. Mandatory flood msura ice Property Information Notes: phase applies in these zones: COUNTY; J HAWAII Zone A:No BFE determined. TMK NO (3)5-9001:008 Zone AE:BFE determined. WATERSHED: I(EAWANW PARCEL ADDRESS: 59-085 AXON)PULE HIGHWAY Zone AH:Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usually areas of pondiogr; KAMUELA,HI 96743 BFE determined. ,,g ,,I Zone AO:Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usually sheet flow on Flood Hazard Information sloping terrain);average depths determined. FIRM INDEX DATE: SEPTEMBER 29,2017 Zone V:Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard(wave aadonf; LETTER OF MAP CHANGE[S}: NONE no BFE determined FEMA FIRM PANEL 155166015SF Zone VE:Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard(wave arrwnW; BFE deternnned. PA14EL EFFECTIVE DATE: SEPTEMBER 29,2017 Zone AEF:Floodvray areas in Zone AE The floodway is the channel of stream plus anyadjacent floodplain areas that must be kept free of encroachment so that the 196 annual chance flood can be carried without increasing the BFE. NON-SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA-An area in a low-to-moderate risk THIS PROPERTY 15 WITHIN A TSUNAMI EVACUTION ZONE: YES flood zone.No mandatory flood insurance purchase requirements appy, FOR MORE INFO,VISIT:hrtp://www.scdhawaii.gov/ but covzrage is available in partcipadng communities. THIS PROPERTY IS VATHIN A DAM EVACUATION ZONE- YES{HA-0147) Zone XS[X shaded):Areas or 0.2%annual chance flood,areas of FOR MORE INFO,VISIT:http:/(dlnreng.hawa'gov/dam,f 1%annual ch.—flood with a•aerege depths of less than 1 foot w with drainage areas less than 1 square mile;and areas '..... protected by levees from I'll annual chance Rood. uu 60P 1,2DQ ft Zone X.Areas determined to be outside the 0.2%annual chance O floodplain. ,he e.a They. art Department d land and of any Resources/conr.,l i-d in Pomsvie /Use from OTHER FLOOD AREAS rhe use;accura_ry;dnmpierzness,and:une7iness of any inra�manan<an:arned in this report b5ewers/Users ere respon;rme for—)ryrng the arum y of rat infarmadon and agree rd Indemnify die 01 NR,izs officers,and emaloy- ees,frorr any nocifiry vshich may orrse from rxs use of=data or elfi—sition. ' Zone D:Un nud ed areas where flood In died are undeter- I / A mined,but flooding isposx hie No mandatory flood insurance if this map has burr identfad as'PREUMINARY;please are that h is being provided far i..fin—mionaf purposes purdnase apply,but coverage is available in participating commu- and is not to be used forfdod insurance rating.Cantoct your county fdoadprain manager far food zone deter-m- nities.. tions to be usedfarmma7iance with docaf fidodplpin m...gemenr regulations. Source: http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FAT/. Note: Area X now defined by FEMA as "Area of Minimal Flood Hazard" 35 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Maps printed by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency indicate that areas makai of Akoni Pule Highway should be evacuated during a tsunami warning (http://www5.hawaii.gov/tsunami/maps.asp). barge extents of Hawaii Island, including the project area, have been struck by highly destructive tsunami in historic times. The April 1, 1946 tsunami had a runup near Waiaka`ilio Bay of 12 feet (Atlas of Ilawai`i, 3" edition) (far below the 40-foot minimum elevation of all future home sites). As with much of the area—including the two large State properties to the north and many properties in Kohala Ranch — the property is subject to dam evacuation from Punawai Reservoir. This 10 million-gallon, earthen irrigation reservoir is 6.45 miles east, mauka of Kohala Mountain Road. Impacts and Mitigation Measures - The area proposed for homes and improvements is outside the designated flood zone, and no flood zone impacts will occur. All house pads would be set back from the shoreline at a minimum elevation of about 40 feet above sea level(and generally above 50 feet),outside the VE flood zone. Per request from the Hawaii County Department of Public Works (see letter in Appendix lb of the EA), the applicant would be amenable to encumbering the limits of gulches and the VE flood zone with drainage easements. This location also prevents exposure in the near and medium term, at least,to tsunami of the scale experienced in human history. The National Weather Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operates the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center, which monitors sudden earth movements throughout the Pacific Basin. A tsunami from earth movements in South America would allow for as much as 15 hours warning time, and 4.5 hours for events in the Aleutian Islands, providing sufficient time for evacuation of island residents. Warning sirens are present in Kawaihae but are not readily audible at the property. The Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency recommends that residents in areas of the island where sirens are not audible sign up for mobile alerts. Sudden movement along faults close to Hawaii 36 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and S are unpredictable and would allow for a few minutes to perhaps an hour of warning time, and evacuation would be more problematic. The Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency will provide alerts in the event of a dam emergency at Punawai Reservoir, and their evacuation procedures would be followed. If the subdivision into six lots is ultimately approved, the hazard zone and appropriate evacuation procedures would be provided to all lot purchasers and an evacuation plan will be developed and included in the Project CCRs. Culverts or bridges will be constructed at locations where roadways cross gullies or gulches. As discussed previously, two of the five intermittent gulches have initially been determined to be waters of the U.S.per Section 404 of the Clean Mater Act,under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS). Project plans avoid any crossing one of these jurisdictional gulches, Keawewai Gulch. Any work that discharges and/or places fill within a jurisdictional water requires a Section 404 permit. During the design phase, project engineers will work with the ACOS to confirm the permit requirements for each gulch; if a bridge is constructed on a jurisdictional water, it is likely that no Section 404 permit will be required. A culvert would require a permit. Concerning drainage, per the Hawaii County Code on Subdivision, Section 23-92. "Drainage, flood, and erosion mitigation measures": a) The subdivider shall construct a storm water disposal system to contain runoff caused by the subdivision improvements within the boundaries of the subdivision, up to the expected one-hour, ten year storm event, as shown in Plate 1 of the Department of Public Works"Storm Drainage Standards",dated October 1970,or any approved revisions,unless those standards specify a greater recurrence interval, in which case, the greater interval shall be used. The amount of expected runoff shall be calculated according to the Department of Public Works "Storm Drainage Standards", dated October 1970, or any approved revisions thereto, or by any nationally-recognized method meeting with the approval of the director of public works. Runoff calculations shall include the effects of all required subdivision improvements, and lot improvements that may be allowed by existing zoning. 37 ............. Kohala Shoreline, LLC`'Change of Zone and S (b) Storm water shall be disposed into drywells, infiltration basins, or other infiltration methods. The subdivision shall not alter the general drainage pattern above or below the subdivision. (c) Subdivider shall also comply with the requirements of chapter 27, Plawai`i County Code. Chapter 27 and the County's Storm Drainage Standards require that all increases in runoff due to a project's development must be captured and disposed of. Rainfall runoff for a six- lot subdivision on the property was calculated by Belt Collins Hawaii (BCH) civil engineers using the Storm Drainage Standards. The total increase in rainfall runoff was calculated to be 6 cubic feet per second(cfs)based on the following calculations: Formula or Runoff Quantity, Q=c' i Runoff Coefficient, c= 0.24 for pre-developed areas 2, =0.9 for hardscaped areas3, = 0.29 weighted average for post-developed areas Rainfall Intensity, i = 3.1 inches Area, A=37.88 acres 1 Q (existing) =28.2 cfs (0.24 x 3.1 x 37.88); Q (post-development) =33.7 (0.29 x 3.1 x 37.88) 2 Based on: low infiltration, hilly relief, good vegetal cover and agriculture development type 3 New hardscape comprised of. 117,000 sf of pavement and 24,000 sf of homesite hardscape. Per Plawai`i Countv DPW comment letter in Appendix lb,the design engineers will a _L--the runoff coefficient of 0.95 for hardscaped areas in the drainage plan submitted to DPW,unless it is determined mutually through consultation with DPW that a different coefficient is as pry 4 Using Plate 4; based on: i=1.5 inch per Plate 1, 10-year, 1-hour storm intensity and 10-minute time of concentration. If the subdivision is approved, drainage structures will be constructed to capture and retain the increase in rainfall runoff generated by the development. Drainage structures may include lava sumps, seepage drains, structures not requiring underground injection control permits, and/or drywells. A typical seepage drain structure has a percolation rate of 2 cfs, whereas a typical drywell structure has a percolation rate of 6 cfs. Given that the subdivision improvements (public parking and driveway pavements) and home sites will be constructed separately, it is conceivable that the installed drainage structures will consist of two seepage drain/drywell for the subdivision improvements and six (one for each lot) seepage drains/drywells for the home sites. 38 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zonae and SAIM _ The above calculations assume a worst-case homesite hardscape of 24,000 square feet. CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design Guidelines (Hawai`i CZM Program. 2006), which were part of the basis for Best Management Practices specifically designed for the current site by landscape architect Leonard Bisel of B+K Design Group. These measures will act to reduce the quantity of hardscape, increase the infiltration capacity of the open areas on the lot, and reduce erosion and sedimentation. These measures, primarily designed to protect water quality, are detailed below. i In this and other appropriate resource sections of the application and EA, relevant conditions that were imposed by the Hawaii County Planning Commission and/or Hawaii County Council as ( 1 i part of SMA 379 and Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-102 have been identified and considered. Condition 9 of SMA 379 and Condition J of Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required a drainage study of the project site for review and approval by the Department of Public Works,in conjunction with submittal of plans for subdivision review. A similar condition is expected to be imposed as I part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit, Rezoning Ordinance and subdivision approval. CLIMATE CHANGE AND SEA LEVEL There is a scientific consensus that the earth is warming due to manmade increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, according to the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Manoa Sea Grant 2014). Global mean air temperatures are projected to increase by at least 2.7°F by the end of the century. This will be accompanied by the warming of ocean waters, expected to be highest in tropical and subtropical seas of the Northern Hemisphere. Wet and dry season contrasts will increase, and wet tropical areas in particular are likely to experience more frequent and extreme precipitation. For Hawaii, where warming air temperatures are already quite apparent, not only is the equable climate at risk but also agriculture, ecosystems, the visitor industry and public health. i 1 39 i Kohala Shoreline, I,I,C Change of Zone and SAM For subdivisions near the shoreline in leeward Hawaii, key considerations are the potential for increased runoff from storms, increased fire risk from droughts, higher wind loads from more frequent hurricanes, and most importantly, rising sea levels. No one can predict with any certainty how high sea levels will rise within 10 years, 20 years or 50 years. An overall global rise in sea level of 3.3 feet by the end of the 21 st century was proposed by Fletcher (2010) and others. A 2012 scientific assessments (e.g., Ramstorf et a12012)posited 4 feet as a reasonable upper bound. Some recent research that concentrates on the potential for Antarctic melting to contribute more to sea level than generally modeled envisions as much as an additional 3.3 feet of sea level rise (DeConto and Pollard 2016). Relative sea-level rise, of course, is a result of the combined water rise and land subsidence. The Big Island of Hawaii is sinking into the Earth's mantle because of the gravitational, isostatic load of its growing volcanoes. A subsidence rate of 0.08-0.12 inches/year related to isostatic sinking has been determined by submersible studies of drowned reefs off West Hawaii (Moore and Fornari 1984). 1 Not only the magnitude of sea level rise but also the timing is the subject of debate. According to the Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (HCC C) (2017:v): j While the IPCC's "business as usual" scenario, where GHG emissions continue at the current rate of increase,predicts up to 3.2 feet of global sea level rise by year 2100 (IPCC 2014), recent observations and projections suggest that this magnitude of sea level rise could occur as early as year 2060 under more recently published highest-end scenarios... The HCCMAC report goes on to state that the Island of Hawaii is the least vulnerable of the main Hawaiian Islands to the impacts of sea level rise,but that certain areas—particularly Kona,Puak6, Kapoho and Hilo Bay"....face serious threats. It was estimated that at least 130 existing structures would experience chronic flooding if there were 3.2 feet of sea level rise." A sea level rise viewer from the Pacific Island Ocean Observing System (https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/slr-hawaii/ provides graphic representation of how regions will be affected by sea level rise (Figure 5b). As the slope in the area is relatively steep, 40 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and S and elevations rise to 10 feet or more above sea level with a few feet of the shoreline, sea level rise in itself will only inundate relatively small areas directly adjacent to the shoreline. This is unlike r Waikiki, e.g., where a 10-foot rise in sea level would inundate large areas. However, aside from simple inundation, a rise in sea level also raises the level of attack for high waves and tsunami. As reported in the online Science Daily based on an article in the Mature journal, Scientific Reports ( ttps:// .science ailyleom/releases/2018/09/180927164230. tm), a research team including LTH Ivlanoa and DLNR dete ined that much sea level rise effects will be much more wide reaching. "By including models of dynamical physical processes such as erosion and wave run-up,a team of researchers has determined that land area in Hawai`i vulnerable to future sea level rise may be double previous estimates." The proposed lots range in elevation from sea level to 160 feet above sea level. No home sites will be allowed makai of the ala loa/jeep road. In the portions of the lots mauka of the ala loa/jeep road, archaeological sites and buffers occupy the lower elevations, which are restricted to Lots 3 and 4 (see Figure 3). The combination of these factors constrains potential home sites to areas higher than 40 feet above sea level, and generally above 50 feet. As such, future homes site will have no exposure to areas subject to 3 to 10 or even 20 feet of sea level rise. To provide context, if sea level were to rise 20 feet, Kawaihae Harbor, all of Puako, Waikiki, and most of downtown Honolulu,Hilo and Kailua would be completely submerged. All future homes within the proposed subdivision would still be at least 20 feet above sea level. Climate change may also induce larger storms, with greater rainfall on an hourly, daily, seasonal or annual basis. This can lead to increased runoff and gulch flow. The property's steeply incised gulches itself will generally prevent gulch overflow except near the ocean, where no development is planned. Any culverts within the subdivision would be obligated by CC&IZs to be oversized to accommodate the 100-year storm, rather than the required 50-year storm, in order to account for future potential increases in runoff. Larger storms may also lead to higher winds. To account for this, CC&Rs will also require that homes be built to withstand Hurricane Category 2 force winds. 41 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that instead of more annual rainfall, climate change may also involve long droughts and even overall drier conditions, increasing wildfire risk. The precautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk discussed in Section 3.1.1 will mitigate additional potential risk. Figure 5b Sea Level Rise Exposure Ma + Zoom to... � BASMgPS EXPOSURE Keawewai M Sea Level Rise Exposure Area Gulch �a 0.5 ft 1.1 ft 2.0 ft 3.2 ft F:.ssi,e Piaoaina c* VULNERABILITY Property 0 Potential Economic Loss S' � 0 Flooded Highways 1 OTHER OVERLAYS r N y ,y expand collapse clear hide PacIOCIS aoo n I 1 Map tlaco 8'20'18 Googie Tenns of Ilse RePon n map error Water Quality Water quality in the nearshore waters of leeward North Kohala is determined by inputs from both overland flow into nearshore surface waters and groundwater flowing out to sea. Background information concerning these two sources are discussed separately below, followed by a discussion of impacts to surface waters and groundwater. SURFACE WATERS In this part of North Kohala, overland water flows primarily in the steep, parallel gulches during infrequent heavy rainfall episodes. Even under natural conditions there is a high erosion rate on the steep, dry slopes. Although recent efforts by area landowners have substantially mitigated the 42 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM problem, flows have historically been muddy and turgid, full of sediment derived from overland sheet and rill flow across partly vegetated areas denuded by former and current cattle grazing, exacerbated by frequent fire and goat grazing. This type of flow delivers sediment that in large quantities can be very harmful and even destroy coral communities. Almost all of the sediment in the gulches is derived from sheet flow and gully erosion from locations rnauka and outside the property, where the vast majority of the drainage basin for each gulch is contained. For example, Keawewai Gulch, the largest gulch on the property, drains the northern part of the property and empties into the ocean just south of the Waiaa`ilio Bay(Fig. 6). According to the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR), the watershed's area is 6 square miles, with a maximum elevation of 4,701 feet; land use in the basin is grassland, shrub/scrub and bare land. (htlp://hawaiiwatershedatlas.com/watersheds/hawaii/85022.pdf). As illustrated in the Google Earth © aerial images in Figure 7, heavy rainfall events transport sediment derived from upland areas and deposit it in the shoreline area. Only 3 percent of the drainage basin, which represents the source of the sediment in the gulch, is within the Kohala Shoreline property. Some degree of sediment input to coastal waters is natural — the gulches that pass through the property were carved out over geologic time by flood events that inexorably carry sediment laden water. Although the marine environment may be adapted to long-term periodic stress from sedimentation events, clearly such adaptation has its limits. Excessive sedimentation is a problem in some locations, and development must not ignore the potential for increased sedimentation. In the big picture in North Kohala,however,the main culprit responsible for excessive sedimentation is overgrazing by cattle and feral ungulates on typically dry lands. When combined with the twin and interrelated scourges of wildfire and fire-adapted alien grasses, sediment discharge to the ocean following periodic severe rainfall events can be substantial. GROUNDWATER In the Hawaiian Islands in general, precipitation that is not cycled into evapotranspiration or conducted through streams into the ocean percolates into the ground to collect in the aquifers under the island before slowly making its way to the sea. Water may be trapped between vertical 43 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and S confining layers such as dikes or perched above horizontal confining layers such as volcanic ash soil, forming high level aquifers. If water continues to diffuse through the layers of rock, sand, soil and gravel, it will reach sea level, fresh water has a lower density than seawater and floats above the saltwater-permeated rock in a body shaped much like a lens, most of which exists below sea level. Due to the difference in densities, for every foot the lens extends above sea level it extends 40 feet below sea level, although the lower areas contain a zone of mixing. Basal water tables have inland gradients that can rise as much as four feet per mile in high rainfall areas. This freshwater- permeated rock is the source of most of the State's groundwater. A basal aquifer underlies the dry coastal areas of North Kohala and is the source of fresh water here as well. This thin, brackish to saline lens overlies saltwater at depth and is in hydraulic contact with seawater at the shoreline. Excessive withdrawals from groundwater can change salinity levels in estuaries, anchialine ponds, and wetlands; excessive nutrients in groundwater derived from infiltration of wastewater and fertilizer can also be a concern. The adverse effects of nutrients are of somewhat less concern for the deep,wave-affected coastlines of leeward North Kohala,where brackish waters emerging from the basal lens mix almost instantly with the background ocean waters, but the concern remains. Figure a eawewai Gulch Drainage basin ^y r.. �'W ;/ r ;„j'prrr, /ii rr „ ',, /i✓sir/r..r '61' �jifr /r /,;7""',-.r", Kr" erravu' ��„ / rr raa+;n;J�T!„�! '�,'lei %' ;, Aw.r(fir' / ' f% /4 � �tr�r r�e': �/,/,�r �f, r.�,G�roW' r flr �'✓� , b r✓/�Y n�/r"� i"/,+ /,,i���lll� ,�„ ;P'r�fi/ if./ (�r1 ��°�!1 f -;.ir �✓r/� Y' r ulrr^"✓�;�" ry ;,^ ',( �Y`r '" "hrtc%"' �;,r ",,i;, ' iY/''/�f ��✓/r�� � /i,.//��ii���0;( '�I �����r fir fl;�/� iUrw r Vr r n;.., !W "' JI1Y , f., �',� ���%i� � rn✓rFJe!�R ly / f�jr it°JY�!��ylf%�/��� rid f ",'� 1/�",, p � r nV�"""r`' V ,,; r;✓r /';, -' r -'n ;, ��'`r�/ r'� ✓r 11�r ��� tl� r� P'�� ! " rr �r/ill�� �. r r ",., � r ��4NEVVai r 4r Drainag' 1 �Y�Orr ! �r+b (��!�/ """" arra .. �' rlr ✓a r WNI�W)! / �, r I, ���s ✓„ ✓,,.lJ ,W d" �" .. �, ,��� ;Y� `wr'���yf/fir� �.Wl"' r r � ��'ry'1NF� 7-• r�rr �Y �/r �' w MuM? w p��"' � �N ���/a rrf�Irn✓^/ ,� d` a. sXwWun(((�✓Yr,. ,,"" fir,y ✓ 1! �rYM s, r Y fYra e OfYaPd ( o \0 y 1 I Shoreline Property �A ��W 1% «r r �rrr °/p 0.5 1 2 ri (Wo S „(�'r✓�J ,?�l)%7n ,aI�IM.�iDim .iu ,.ca(iuur�w,(M% /,�'tl,,,r/ nr .,«.mr�" .,.,� '""w., 4".;' .����.', ., �li": ... 44 ttt Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIM - of the State of Hawaii Department of Health (DOH) Water Quality Standards. These criteria include total dissolved nitrogen (TDN), nitrate+nitrite nitrogen (NO3"+N®a",hereafter referred to as N03_), ammonium nitrogen 4+), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), orthophosphate phosphorus (P04'3), Chlorophyll a (Chl a), turbidity, temperature, pH and salinity. In addition, silica (Si) was also reported because this parameter is a sensitive indicator of biological activity and the degree of groundwater mixing. Groundwater sampling excluded chlorophyll and turbidity. The well sample results (Table 2) reflect the baseline water chemistry of the water prior to leaking into the nearshore waters, where it mixes with seawater, with some constituents taken up in biological processes. These samples assisted in analysis of the water chemistry of the nearshore waters. Table 2. Lab Results of Well Water Chemistry a les Sample Location NO3 NH4N 'TN PO4 DOP TP Silica Salinity f (pM) (µM) (pM) (gM) (ItM µM) (Fi (pM) (PPT) ) Well 6549-01 70.4 1.05 12.0 83.5 3.30 0.15 3.45 875 0.228 r Well 6451-03 92.1 1.30 1.75 1.50 95.1 0.65 2.15 962 1.712 Source: TNWRE 2015 Notes: 1. Samples collected on December 17, 2009 by Tom Nance. 2. Laboratory analyses by Marine Analytical Specialists (EPA Labcode: HI 00009). 3. Results presented in micro-molar(µM) units can be converted to milligrams per liter by multiplying by the atomic weight and dividing by 1000. For the marine transects, Site 1 was located off the northern portion of the property in Waiaka`ilio Pay; Site 2 was located off the southern portion of the property, and Site 3 was located in a small embayment approximately 2,000 feet south of the southern property boundary. As Site 3 is well removed from the property, it served as both as a comparison site to evaluate any unique characteristics at the property and as a control site for any future monitoring that may be required for implementation of the project. All three survey sites were sampled in December 2009 and March 2015 in identical manners. 46 KohalaShoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Figure ure 8, Water Quality Sample Sites l r ru F� orre s i x rhe '• � 1 , y a° C.01 e � `,.,_...rte 1000 feet Water quality was evaluated on marine transects that were oriented perpendicular to the shoreline and depth contours. Water samples were collected at ten locations on each transect from just seaward of the shoreline to approximately 200 meters (m)offshore(0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 5 0,100 and 200 m). The sampling scheme was designed to span the greatest range of salinity with respect to potential freshwater efflux at the shoreline. Sampling was more concentrated in the nearshore zone because this area receives the majority of groundwater discharge,and hence is most important with respect to identifying the effects of shoreline modification. ®wing to the shallow depth of the nearshore shelf, at stations from the shoreline extending to 4 in from shore, a single sample was collected within 20 centimeters (cm) of the sea surface by swimmers working from shore. At stations 5 to 200 in from the shoreline, samples were collected I ' at two depths; a surface sample was collected within approximately 20 cm of the sea surface, and a bottom sample was collected within lm of the sea floor. 47 ' 1 FI Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM L Surface water samples were collected by filling pre-rinsed, 1-liter polyethylene bottles. Deep 7 water samples were collected using a Niskin-type oceanographic sampling bottle. The bottle is lowered to the desired sampling depth (approximately 1-2 in off the bottom) with spring-loaded Rendcaps held open so water can pass freely through the bottle. At the desired sampling depth, a U weighted messenger released from the surface triggers closure of the endcaps, isolating a volume F, of water. Subsamples for nutrient analyses were immediately placed in 125-milliliter (ml) acid- Lil washed, triple rinsed, polyethylene bottles and stored on ice. Analyses for Si, NH4+, PO4-3, and NO3- were performed on filtered subsamples with a Teclmicon Autoanalyzer using standard methods for seawater analysis (Strickland and Parsons 1968, Grasshoff 1983). TDN and TDP were analyzed in a similar fashion following digestion. Dissolved organic nitrogen (DON) and dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP) were calculated as the difference between TDN and dissolved inorganic N, and TDP and dissolved inorganic P,respectively. U FWater for other analyses was subsampled from 1-liter polyethylene bottles and kept chilled until Li analysis. Chl a was measured by filtering 300 ml of water through glass-fiber filters;pigments on filters were extracted in 90% acetone in the dark at -20o C for 12-24 hours. Fluorescence before and after acidification of the extract was measured with a Turner Designs fluorometer. Salinity was determined using an AGE Model 2100 laboratory salinometer with a readability of 0.00011 parts per thousand(ppt). Turbidity was determined using a 90-degree nephelometer and reported rl in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) (precision of 0.01 NTU). Vertical profiles of salinity, temperature and depth were acquired using an RBR-620 CTD calibrated to factory standards. All fieldwork for both surveys was conducted by Dr. Steven Dollar. All laboratory analyses were L conducted by Marine Analytical Specialists in Honolulu,HI(Labcode: HI 00009). This analytical FI laboratory possesses acceptable ratings from EPA-compliant proficiency and quality control testing. Within Appendix 6 of the EA, Tables I and 2 of show results of all water chemistry analyses for samples collected off the property in March 18, 2015, while Tables 3 and 4 show similar results for December 2009. Table 1 shows concentrations of dissolved nutrients in micromolar (pM) units; Table 2 shows concentrations in micrograms per liter (µg/L,). Concentrations of eight 48 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA dissolved nutrient constituents in surface and deep samples are plotted as functions of distance from the shoreline in Figures 2 (2015) and 3 (2009). Values of salinity, turbidity, Chl a and turbidity as functions of distance from shore are shown in Figures 4(2015)and 5 (2009). Several patterns of distribution are evident in Tables 1-4 and Figures 2-5 of Appendix 6 of the EA. It can be seen in Figures 2 and 3 that at all three transects,the dissolved nutrients Si NO3-and TN display distinctly elevated concentrations in the samples collected within about 5 m from the shoreline at transect sites 2 and 3. The peak values at the shoreline were at the shoreline at Transect I in 2015, although no such distinct nearshore peak is evident for these nutrients at transect site 1 in 2009. Salinity displays the opposite trend, with sharply lower concentrations in the nearshore samples at all sites in 2015, and at sites 2 and 3 in 2009 (EA Appendix 6,Figures 4 and 5). These patterns are a result of concentrated input of groundwater to the ocean near the shoreline. Low salinity groundwater,which typically contains high concentrations of Si and NO3-,percolates to the ocean at the shoreline, resulting in a nearshore zone of mixing. In many areas of the Hawaiian Islands, such groundwater percolation results in steep horizontal gradients of increasing salinity and decreasing nutrients moving seaward.P043-is also generally elevated in groundwater relative to ocean water. However,during both sampling years,the patterns of horizontal gradients of concentrations Of P043- do not show the same -uniformly progressive decreases with distance from shore as Si and NO3-. Horizontal gradients of TN and TP reflect the patterns of NO3- and PO4 3-,respectively. Horizontal gradients of NH4+were evident close to the shoreline during both years of sampling,but much less pronounced than for inorganic nutrients. At the open coastal sampling locales off the property,the zone of mixing is small, extending only several meters from shore. These gradients are far less pronounced than at other areas of West Hawaii where either semi-enclosed embayments occur or mixing processes are less vigorous. Water chemistry parameters that are not associated with groundwater input (TON, TOP) do not show a sharp gradient of decreasing concentration with respect to distance from the shoreline. Rather,these constituents show no consistent pattern across the horizontal ranges of the sampling area. 49 F-11 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA I i -- Similar to the patterns of dissolved inorganic nutrients(Si and NO3-),the distribution of Ch1 a and turbidity also display peaks near the shoreline, with rapidly diminishing values seaward of the i shoreline (Tables 1-4, Figures 4 and 5 of EA Appendix 6). Beyond 10 m from the shoreline, the concentration of Ch1 a in surface waters is essentially constant across the sampling scheme at ! values below 0.2 pg/L in 2015 (Figure 4) and 0.1 µg/L in 2009 (Figure 5). Turbidity displays the same trend with peak values near the shoreline and rapidly diminishing values beyond about 10 m I from the shoreline which extend across the remainder of the sampling regime(Figures 4 and 5). r-, LJ It can be seen in Tables 1-4 of EA Appendix 6 that chemical concentrations at the most seaward sampling stations(200 m from shore)at all three sites are similar and represent open coastal ocean waters with little influence from land. I ) A useful treatment of water chemistry data for interpreting the extent of material input from land is application of a hydrographic mixing model. In the simplest form, such a model consists of plotting the concentration of a dissolved chemical species as a function of salinity. The concept n. I of using such mixing models which scale nutrient concentrations to salinity is utilized by the L Hawaii State DOH for establishing a unique set of water quality standards for the West Coast of the Island of Hawaii [Hawai`i Administrative Rules Chapter 11-54-06 (d)]. As the northern limit of these regulations is Malae Point in North Kohala, the shoreline area containing the Kohala Shoreline property is included in the West Hawaii criteria. i Figures 6 and 7 of EA Appendix 6 show plots of the concentrations of Si,NO3-,PO43-, and NH4+ as functions of salinity for the samples collected at each transect site off the Kohala Shoreline L property in 2015 and 2009, respectively. Each graph also shows two conservative mixing lines constructed by connecting the endmember concentrations of open ocean water and groundwater L from two high level potable wells located upslope of the property(TNWRE 2010). Comparison of the curves produced by the distribution of data with conservative mixing lines provides an indication of the origin and fate of the material in question. If the parameter in question displays purely conservative behavior (i.e., no input or removal from any process other than 50 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM physical mixing), data points should fall on, or near, the conservative mixing line. If, however, external material is added to the system through processes such as leaching of fertilizer nutrients to groundwater, data points will fall above the mixing line. If material is being removed from the system by processes such as biological uptake, data points will fall below the mixing line. Dissolved Si represents a check on the method, as this material is present in high concentrations in groundwater, low concentration in open coastal waters, and is not a major component of fertilizer or sewage effluent. In addition, Si is not utilized rapidly within the nearshore environment by biological processes. It can be seen in Figures 6 and 7 of EA Appendix 6 that all data points for all three transect sites fall in a linear array on the conservative mixing line created with end-point concentrations from the two wells. In 2014, data points for Transect I fell close to the mixing line for Well 6451-03,while data points for Transect 3 lie closer to the mixing line for Well 6451-03. Data points for Transect 2 fall slightly below both mixing lines. In 2009, data points for Transect 2 fall on the mixing line for Well 6451-03. While there are slight variations between transects, and between sampling years, the straight lines prescribed by the data points lying close to the mixing lines support the contention that Si is behaving as a conservative tracer and that well water sampled from the upslope wells is similar in composition to groundwater entering the ocean off the Kohala Shoreline property. The plots of NO3-versus salinity show a somewhat dissimilar distribution to that of Si. While data points for Transects 1 and 2 fall near the mixing line, data points for Transect 3 deviate in a linear Fi array above the mixing line. These patterns indicate that on Transect 3 there is a subsidy of NO3" U in the nearshore ocean relative to what would be predicted from mixing of natural groundwater and open coastal water. Such subsidies may result from either different composition of groundwater entering the ocean at the shoreline than in upslope wells, or from groundwater nutrient subsidies from developments upgradient of the Kohala Shoreline property (i.e., Kohala Ranch and Kohala Estates). Concentrations of NO3' on Transect 2 were substantially higher in 2009 compared to 2015. While PO4 3-is also generally found in groundwater in higher concentrations than open coastal F_ 51 FKohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA r—; j Li water, it occurs in far lower concentrations compared to NO3-, owing in part to a high absorptive � affinity of phosphorus in soils or rock. It can be seen in Figures 6 and 7 of EA Appendix 6 that ' I Li when plotted as functions of salinity, concentrations of P043- do not prescribe linear patterns F similar to Si and NO3-. Some of the highest values are at the highest salinities,while some of the -' lowest values are at the lower salinities. J Plots of concentrations of NH4+ versus salinity show similar relationship as PO4-3. Plots of concentrations of N114+versus salinity exhibit no linear trends with respect to salinity(Figures 6 and 7). As with PO4 3 some of the highest values of NH4+ occurred at the highest salinities, suggesting that the source of most of the NH4+ in the nearshore ocean is not from the land but rather from biological processes occurring in the ocean. V� iJ The West Coast of the Island of Hawaii has area-specific water quality standards [Chapter UI( §11-54-6(d)]. The major difference between these specific criteria and the general criteria for open coastal waters for the rest of the state is the consideration that high nutrient groundwater mixes U 71 with oceanic water within the nearshore zone. As a result, area-specific criteria for nutrients that occur in high concentrations in groundwater relative to ocean water(NO3-,TDN,PO4+,and TDP) are evaluated by two criteria based on salinity. In areas where nearshore marine water salinity is greater than 32%o, specific criteria for geometric means apply. Geometric means are calculated at Ell each sampling station from three values collected on three sampling dates, spaced within a 14-day period. For samples with salinity below 32%0,compliance with the DOH criteria is defined by the slope of the regression line of the nutrient concentration as a famction of salinity. Slopes greater than the "not to exceed" values stated in the standards are deemed out of compliance. (Note that I ! for the present assessment,three separate samplings within a 14-day period were not conducted). In EA Appendix 6, it can be seen in Tables 1-4 that in 2015 only a single sample at the shoreline of Transect 1 had salinity less than 32%o,while in 2009 Transect 2 was the only sampling location with at least one sample with salinity less than 32%o. Hence, it can be interpreted that the relevant DOH compliance criteria are the regression statistics shown in §1 1-54-6(d)(1)(ii). Table 5 shows _ the slopes and upper and lower 95% confidence limits of linear regressions of NO3-, TDN,PO43-, and TDP as functions of salinity from each of the three ocean transects. Also shown in Table 5 L 52 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA are the "compliance slopes" listed in the West Hawaii area-specific water quality standards. As stated in the WQS, "...the absolute value of the upper 95% confidence limit for the calculated sample regression coefficient (i.e., slope) shall not exceed the absolute value listed in the regulations." When linear regression analyses are performed with data in units of µg/L, the 0 absolute values of confidence limits of the slope of the regression line of NO3- versus salinity exceeded the absolute values of the specific criteria slope (-31.92) on Transects 2 and 3 in 2009 and Transect 1 in 2015. The upper confidence limit of TDN on Transect 2 in 2009 and Transect I in 2015 also exceeded the specific criteria slope(Table 5). The area-specific DOH standards for West Hawaii also include three parameters (NH4+, Ch1 a and turbidity)that are not subject to the conditions of salinity based on the 32%o boundary. Rather, the specific geometric mean criteria apply to all values of these parameters regardless of salinity. As shown in EA Appendix 6,Tables 2 and 4,there are many values of NH4+on all three transects within 50 m of the shoreline exceed the geometric mean standard. Similarly, most of the values of turbidity exceed standards. As stated above, with little or no development presently on the Kohala Shoreline property,the offshore conditions may represent essentially the natural setting of the area, although there are legitimate differences of opinion regarding this. The DLNR Division of Aquatic Resources has stated that the turbidity goes beyond that which should be expected as a result of natural surface erosion in these nearshore waters, and that furthermore there are clear effects on the aquatic biota, particularly coral cover. Conversely, as conjectured by MRC, it is possible that the geometric mean values that are presently DOH compliance criteria do not fully consider the natural setting of at least some nearshore areas subject to ephemeral stream flow in West Hawaii. This subject is discussed more fully in EA Section 3.1.4 in the context of aquatic biota. Impacts and Mitigation Measures: General Considerations Given the two input water sources to the nearshore environment—runoff channeled into gulches and groundwater emerging through the basal lens—it is important to eliminate or reduce pollution Ll from both gulches and groundwater, and to evaluate the effect of changes in water quality and quantity when they do occur. When land in a dry, scrubby, sloped area is developed with homes, there are changes in the input dynamics. Sediment input can increase temporarily during 53 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM P, construction, if mitigation is absent or ineffective. Excess sediment input can also occur during occupation of the homes as well, although some landscape and development practices can actually reduce the amount runoff and erosion and thus the sediment transported in gulches. Separately, 7 nutrients from fertilizers,pesticides and other contaminants can infiltrate the soil column and pass through rock into the groundwater. If transported in excessive amounts that exceed the capacity of the soil and rock to remediate them,these contaminants can affect groundwater. Eli Ell Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Surface Waters Construction has the potential to produce uncontrolled excess sediment from soil erosion during and after clearing and excavation that may impact natural watercourses,water quality and flooding. Contaminants associated with heavy equipment and other sources during construction can impact surface water and groundwater if not mitigated effectively. In this discussion,mitigation that will U be required—either by law, regulation or CC&R codicils that are expected to be mandated when permit approvals are granted—is presented first,to set the stage for the evaluation of impacts. �U In order to minimize the potential for sedimentation and erosion of shoreline areas,the contractor shall perform all earthwork and grading in conformance with Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, Hawaii County Code. Grading permits are expected to be required for development of infrastructure (roadways and parking areas), and grading plans will be developed by an engineer Dand submitted to the County Department of Public Works. F� Furthermore,because infrastructure development for the project will disturb more than one acre, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit will likely be needed before the project infrastructure construction commences. This permit requires the completion of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In order to properly manage storm water runoff, the L SVvTPP will describe the emplacement of a number of best management practices (BMPs)for the F project. These BMPs may include,but will not be limited to,the following: L Minimization of soil loss and erosion by revegetation and stabilization of slopes and IL disturbed areas of soil, possibly using hydromulch, geotextiles, or binding substances, as soon as possible after working; I L 54 I L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM • Minimization of sediment loss by emplacement of structural controls possibly including 0 silt fences, gravel bags, sediment ponds, check dams, and other barriers, in order to retard and prevent the loss of sediment from the site; • Minimizing disturbance of soil during periods of heavy rain; • Phasing of large projects in order to disturb a minimum necessary area of soil at a particular time; • Application of protective covers to soil and material stockpiles; • Construction and use of a stabilized construction vehicle entrance; • Use of drip pans beneath vehicles not in use in order to trap vehicle fluids; • Routine maintenance of BMPs by adequately trained personnel; and • Cleanup of significant leaks or spills and disposal at an approved site, if they occur. At the points in time when individual lot owners build their homes, there may be additional land clearing that involves areas of an acre or less, which may or may not be subject to NPDES or grading permits. In order to ensure proper mitigation for potential sedimentation,the project will adopt relevant protocols for grading of the lots,similar to those in the Recommended Construction Best Management Practices (BMWs) for Land Disturbance of Less Than One Acre that was approved by Board of Directors of the Kohala Ranch Community Association,on August 9,2007. LJ Specifically,the following are proposed as both CC&Rs applicable to all lots in the project and as conditions of approval of the SMA Use Permit: (a) Construction Management Techniques U (1) Limit clearing and grubbing to the minimum necessary for grading and equipment F� operation. ILI (2) Sequence construction to minimize the exposure time of the cleared surface area (3) Stage or phase construction for large projects. Stabilize the land surface in one phase before land disturbing activities are initiated in another phase. Stabilization must be accomplished by temporarily or permanently protecting the disturbed soil surface from rainfall impacts and runoff. 55 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change ofZone'and SAM (4) Erosion and sediment control measures must be in place and functional before earth moving operations begin. These measures shall be properly constructed and maintained throughout the construction period. (5) All control measures must be checked and repaired as necessary, for example, weekly in dry periods and within twenty-four hours after any rainfall of 0.5 inches or greater within a 24-hour period. During prolonged rainfall, daily checking may be necessary. Maintain records of checks and repairs. (6)Maintain records of the duration and estimated volume of storm water discharge(s). (7) A specific individual shall be designated to be responsible for erosion and sediment controls on each project site. LJ (b)Vegetation Controls (1)Pre-construction vegetative ground cover shall not be destroyed,removed,or disturbed ji more than twenty calendar days prior to land disturbance. 71 (2) Temporary soil stabilization with appropriate vegetation must be applied on areas that U will remain unfinished for more than thirty calendar days. (3) Permanent soil stabilization with perennial vegetation or pavement shall be applied as soon as practical after:final grading.Irrigation and maintenance of the perennial vegetation Ell must be provided for thirty calendar days or until the vegetation takes root, whichever is shorter. (c) Structural Controls Li (1)Storm water flowing toward the construction area must be diverted by using appropriate control measures, as practical. L (2) Erosion control measures shall be designed according to the size of disturbed or 11­1 I L i drainage areas to detain runoff and trap sediment. (3) Water must be discharged in a manner that the discharge shall not cause or contribute r_1 Ll to a violation of State of Hawaii Water Quality Standards. F L The project engineer will also explore the use of "mini-sediment basins", as successfully implemented in the Kohala Estates subdivision. Rather than excavating one or two large basins, these involve multiple areas that enhance existing topographic basins near intermittent gulches to capture small amounts of runoff that cumulatively offer significant percolation. These 56 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA professionally engineered but low-key basins are lower in cost and involve less disruption to scenery and vegetation(Susan Fischer,pers. comm.). In addition to the above requirements related to grading permits, NPDES permits and locally derived BMPs, CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) Guidelines (Hawai'i CZM Program 2006). While not all design guidelines are appropriate to any given site, one principle that connects all LID practices is sustainability. "LID is defined as a more sustainable land development pattern than the conventional method currently used in most areas. It incorporates a suite of landscaping and design techniques known as "Better Site Design" that attempt to maintain the natural,pre-development hydrology of a site and the surrounding watershed. An important LID principle is the idea that stormwater is not Ll merely a waste product to be disposed of, but rather that rainwater is a resource. LID also integrates a range of structural best management practices(BMPs)for road design and stormwater and wastewater management systems that minimize envirormiental impacts (Hawai'i CZM Program 2006: 1-2). These guidelines seek to prevent environmental impacts rather than compensate for them; D11 minimize the use of regional conveyance systems; preserve natural areas; reduce impact on watershed hydrology;utilize less complex,non-structural methods to lower cost and maintenance; and create a multifunctional landscape. LID Guidelines were part of the basis for Best Management Practices specifically designed for the current site by landscape architect Leonard Bisel of B+K Design Group. The measures are consistent with the U.S. Green Building Council (USGBQ requirements and strategies needed to obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (LEED) certification. They are also D consistent with requirements and strategies needed to obtain certification in the Sustainable Sites I Initiative (SITES)program,which was devel oped, in part,by the American Society of Landscape U Architects. These measures will act to reduce the quantity of hardscape, increase the infiltration capacity of the open areas on the lot,and reduce erosion and sedimentation. For the current project, 57 F_,� Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM the following guidelines will be incorporated in project design as requirements of the CC&Rs. These measures are described and illustrated in detail in EA Appendix 5 and summarized below. L DESIGN CONCEPT#1 -Limit site disturbance: This design measure has a simple and straightforward rationale: the less area that is disturbed during the development and construction of new home sites,the less potential there will be for Uincreased erosion and sediment loss. The following will be required to be undertaken to ensure limited site disturbance: 1. Clearing and grading of the site will be done in such a way that existing,mature vegetation above and/or below an excavated area is preserved. Vegetated buffers above construction sites aid in the prevention of high-volume sheet flow across cut/fill areas. Vegetated buffers below construction sites help to filter and trap sediment before it can travel to existing waterways. 2. To ensure that significant natural characteristics such as landforms, vegetation, scenic qualities and open space are preserved, a significant portion of each lot will be reserved as ru "Natural Area." No development will be allowed within the Natural Areas. Prior to planning of the homes and hardscape on each lot, naturally vegetated buffers 10 feet in width on both sides of gulches will be delineated and preserved in a lot landscape plan to be filed in accordance with CC&Rs. 3. As each lot is developed, the homeowner and architect will work with the homeowners' association to identify a proposed Building Envelope. All site improvements will fall within the limits of the proposed Building Envelope. Site improvements include, but are not limited to, built structures, private outdoor spaces, grading, drainage, fencing, and retaining walls. Additionally, certain site improvements, such as utility connections,may L fall outside of the Building Envelope. Building Envelopes should comply with all setback r7 criteria and respond to natural features, such as topography and vegetation. Once the L Building Envelope has been established, the remainder of the Suggested Building Site Location will become Natural Area. I_J f - For areas within the Building Envelope,the following design concepts will be implemented: L 58 C ; I L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM LJ DESIGN CONCEPT#2 -Take a less engineered approach to site grading: Minimizing the amount of disturbed area is an important consideration in terms of reducing erosion. The unique physical characteristics of a site are also important and should be acknowledged and expressed in the site design and grading. Grading methods that strike a balance between the two and are not entirely focused on the efficiency of space are preferred. The following will be required to be considered in the development of each parcel: 1. The grading plan that will be developed by a Civil Engineer in consultation with a Landscape Architect must keep aesthetics in mind and focus on the sense of place. All cut C and fill slopes, retaining walls and other site features must be designed to blend into, and reflect the natural characteristic of the site and the surrounding area. Avoid grading that has static, engineered slopes that look unnatural and do not blend in with the surrounding topography. Encourage grading that has natural,undulating slopes that mimic the adjacent landforms and incorporates its natural features. 2. Foundations and exterior spaces should step down with, or be set into, the natural topography wherever practical. 3. Site grading must be adjusted to retain existing vegetation and trees, wherever possible. DESIGN CONCEPT#3 -Maximize percolation/Minimize runoff- hnpervious surfaces such as roofs, driveway and parking areas, patios, pool decks and walkways reduce the absorption of rainwater into the ground and increase surface runoff. The following will be considered in the development of each parcel to maximize percolation and minimize runoff- D, 1. Impervious surfaces will be reduced to the smallest area possible. All other areas will be maintained as landscaped area and covered with planting, porous stone ground cover or mulch. Wherever possible, all existing vegetated areas will be retained. 2. Utilize porous materials for driveways,parking areas, and outdoor spaces where possible. Rainwater from non-porous or semi-porous surfaces swill be directed onto landscaped areas. Roof runoff will be captured in gutters and either directed to a cistern and stored for 59 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SNDA irrigation or directed to a landscaped area with the potential to absorb up to two inches of Froof runoff,reducing the volume of site runoff even in moderately large storms. - 3. Existing vegetated areas and proposed landscaped areas will reduce the velocity of storm water runoff and prevent erosion. Landscaped areas allow runoff to percolate into the soil, which promotes groundwater recharge, filters sediment and other pollutants, and helps to —; prevent flooding. U 4. Install grassed swales or drainage trenches,as needed,to direct and transmit excess surface flow to detention basins to collect and slow down runoff from impervious surfaces. 5. Proper design and monitoring of landscape irrigation are important considerations in controlling erosion and sedimentation. The following will be considered in the development of each parcel when designing and maintaining an irrigation system, as well as common area irrigation): U a) Utilize low-flow/low application rate irrigation heads and drip irrigation that will not J j apply water faster than it can be absorbed by the soil. Jl b) Separate irrigation valves/zones by plant type (combine plants with similar watering requirements), microclimate (i.e. sunny areas vs. shady areas), and physical site li differences (i.e. slope areas vs. flat areas). J1 c) Install a flow sensor which will shut off the irrigation system in the event of a sudden pressure loss due to a broken head,ruptured mainline or lateral line,or defective valve. I U DESIGN CONCEPT#4—Alternative approaches to slope retention/stabilization: Ij To the extent possible,site disturbance/grading will be limited in order to minimize erosion ice; and sediment loss. Proposed development will be designed to fit the natural contours, where Upossible. The use of retaining walls and graded slopes may be required in order to build on hilly terrain. Retaining walls can be effective in controlling erosion because they break-up and fJ U slow down the rate of surface flow on a slope. Where retaining walls and graded slopes are utilized, the following must be considered as alternate approaches to slope retention and stabilization in a plan designed by an Architect/Engineer in consultation with a Landscape Architect: 60 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM P_ 1. Retaining walls will be designed to blend in with the adjacent topography. Curved,organic forms are encouraged rather than straight lines. Where possible,utilize stone that is native to the area to construct the walls. Break up long lengths of retaining walls with materials such as boulders and portions of dry-stacked boulder walls or consider allowing portions of the existing slope to extend through the wall. Introduce plantings at the top and bottom of walls to create a softer look. Where terraced walls are utilized, incorporate planting between the terraces. 2. Existing vegetation will be required to be retained wherever possible. When existing trees will be saved, the ground surface and flow of water will not be altered within an area that extends out 1-1/2 times the diameter of the drip line of the tree. Appropriate walls should be constructed to maintain existing grades. 3. All exposed slopes should be stabilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation. The FJ following are options to consider instead of(or in addition to) planting; geotextile mats, erosion control blankets, temporary/permanent seeding, reinforced mats, bonded fiber J matrices, and stone blankets. 4. Where possible, keep drainage as a natural, sheet surface flow. Runoff will be directed into grassed or vegetated swales, detention basins, landscaped areas, storm drains or other areas located downstream that are not prone to erosion. 5. All areas of exposed soil will be vegetated ated or covered with a stable layer of mulch as soon as the site grading is completed. All slope areas will be planted with trees, shrubs, and ground covers that are both appropriate for the area and are known to be effective for FJ erosion control. A list of suggested plants for slope retention and stabilization is provided in EA Appendix 5. Although home construction on the Kohala Shoreline property, if done poorly, could add slightly to sedimentation, careful development can actually substantially reduce the amount of sediment- D laden runoff that enters the ocean relative to the no-development condition. This is because the current site is typical of the leeward North Kohala coast,with many bare or poorly vegetated areas L subject to overgrazing by goats and the ravages of fire. Without management, the cycle of alien grass proliferation, overgrazing, fire, erosion, and soil depletion will continue indefinitely. The extensive array of measures that will be required as part of development by regulations, laws and 61 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA J CC&R mandated actions will minimize erosion and sedimentation. Although the property is responsible for less than 3 percent of the runoff that flows in deep gulches through the property— with areas upland responsible for 97 percent—it is still possible to make a meaningful reduction. Any reduction is critical. In the opinion of the DLNR Division of Aquatic Resources, repeated (_j high runoff has measurably affected coral cover. The need for reducing sedimentation to maintain and improve the aquatic biota is carried through below. Impacts and Mitigation.treasures: Groundwater Development of any area can bring about changes in groundwater quantity and chemistry. In general, the impacts from a project as small as a six-lot subdivision are very small, and perhaps U1 undetectable through sampling,but the quantity of impact can be modeled. Water is needed for in- Uhome and landscape irrigation uses. For this area of North Kohala,where water systems are private a and there is no long-distance transport of domestic water into the area, water supply comes from j local wells. Extracting and utilizing this water diverts it from entering the ocean as groundwater. However,much or even most of that water is recirculated back into the ground through wastewater and that fraction of irrigation water that is not evaporated from the ground or transpired by plants. In dry areas such as leeward Kohala, about 15 percent of the irrigation water returns. The"return U flow"can contain various amounts of pollutants including nutrients and chemicals. Keeping these U pollutants to a minimum so as not to degrade receiving waters requires effective wastewater treatment and proper irrigation and cultivation practices,as discussed in the design concepts above. The relationship among these factors can be modeled conceptually: U Groundwater flow beneath property post-development= Groundwater flow beneath property pre-development—Water extracted in wells for development+(Irrigation return flow+Wastewater return flow The hydrologic assessment on water resources in EA Appendix 7, coupled with the investigations by marine biologists for the project previously proposed for the property (Marine Research Consultants 2010,2015)evaluated the hydrological factors,water chemistry dynamics and.marine habitat of the area. The hydrologic assessment specifically addressed the development of 6 homes utilizing potable water for home use and landscaping under two different scenarios. One is a low- 62 U i ' Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA use scenario of 750 gallons per day(gpd),which will be encouraged by the CC&Rs that require a reduced water use footprint in conformance with Low Impact Design Guidelines with low-water F1 use fixtures and landscaping limited to xerophytic species. The second is a higher scenario of 1,500 gallons per day, which would be more typical of resort housing with some restrictions on F_ landscaping. In addition to home use, it is assumed that the subdivision entry feature and public parking area will utilize 1,300-1,500 gpd. Table 3 presents and provides the rationale for expected F_ water quantity and chemistry values resulting from development of homes under the two scenarios. Table 3. Potential Changes to Groundwater Discha in Along Pro pertv Shoreline Component of Flow Flowrate Nitrogen Phosphorus (MGD) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) Pre-Development 0.80 7.7902 0.7127 Groundwater Withdrawal(Kohala Ranch Wells,750 gpd) -0.0028 -0.0268 -U.UVY-I+ Groundwater Withdrawal(Kohala.Ranch Wells, 1,500 gpd) -0.0052 -0.0512 -0.0046 Percolation of Wastewater from Leach Field +0.0028 +0.0337 +0.0037 Excess Landscape Irrigation(750 gpd) +0.0006 +0.0054 +0.0005 Excess Landscape Irrigation(1,500 gpd) +0.0012 +0.0120 +0.0010 Capture and Disposal of Increase of Rainfall Runoff in Drywells_ +0.0014 0.0076 0.0005 Resulting Post-Development Calculated Flowrate(750.gpd)(in MGD) 0.8010 7.8101 0.7150 Calculated Flowrate(1,500 gpd)(in MGD) +0.7992 7.7923 0.7133 Change Over Pre-Development Condition(750 gpd)(in%) +0.12% +0.26% +0.32% Change Over Pre-Development Condition(1,500 gpd)(in%) -0.10% +0.03% +0.08010 tJ Source:Appendix 7.Two scenarios of average water use/home are presented: 750 gpd and 1,500 gpd Notes: Of the 0.85 MGD of groundwater flowing beneath the property and discharging at the shoreline,its average salinity is 5.0 PPT and its nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations are the same as in Well 6451-03(see Table 2).Salinity changes are negligible and thus not listed in table. Nutrient changes from wastewater based on planned advanced wastewater treatment systems. Evaluations of changes to groundwater flux and composition resulting from the proposed six-lot subdivision indicate that groundwater flow along the half-mile of coastline fronting the property Li would essentially stay the same, varying from an increase of 0.12% under the 750 gpd/home scenario to -0.10%under the 1,500 gpd/home scenario. Accompanying the changes in flow rates would be very relatively small increases in nutrient loading of far less than 0.5%under for nitrogen or phosphorus under any scenario. The calculated potential changes to groundwater discharging along the project's shoreline are so small as to be 'undetectable relative to natural seasonal variations of these parameters. Furthermore, dilution of groundwater at the shoreline and within the nearshore zone by turbulent 63 i_ Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change o,f Zone and SMA n mixing will result in essentially no change to groundwater-marine water dynamics. Even if measured concentrations of nutrients are increased by the projected amounts with the development -' in place, nearshore waters are so well-mixed by ocean waves that there is little likelihood that concentrations will increase beyond the present ranges of conditions. Li It is also noteworthy that post-development nutrients in the effluent groundwater would be J considerably lower than in naturally occurring groundwater in other areas of West Hawaii. Elevated nutrient levels at the shoreline as a result of groundwater discharge are natural conditions along the entirety of the West Hawaii shoreline. This has occurred as long as the island has existed, pre-dating any human activities. In fact, based on the data collected for this project, the U North Kohala coastline experiences some of the smallest discharges of groundwater along the nentire West Hawaii coastline owing to the local geologic and hydrologic processes. Areas with substantially higher natural groundwater input that also contain measurable inputs from human activities, such as the South Kohala and North Kona shorelines, contain some of the most well developed coral reef habitats in Hawaii. It has been well documented that discharge of groundwater at these areas is not a negative factor with respect to reef development, lending support to the conclusion that the miniscule addition of nutrients off the property will have no adverse effect on water quality. In summary, results of the water chemistry analysis indicate that there does not appear to be any potential for substantial project-related adverse impacts to marine waters off the property. U Changes of land use associated with the proposed project should not change water quality of the offshore area to any discernible extent. Through its methodology of sampling well water in the Lilower areas of Kohala Ranch,this analysis considered the cumulative nutrient effects of the project plus those of this large residential agricultural subdivision situated mauka of the Kohala Shoreline property. It is important to note concerning water quality that water is a public trust resource. This applies to all water resources without exception. It is the duty of agencies to try to maintain waters in their _ natural state,protect water for use in drinking,maintain water for Native Hawaiian use,and protect reserved water per water code.Applicants who wish to utilize water must show that: f 64 i� i Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA 1J i 1. There is no harm in fact, or FJ 2. That any potential harm does not preclude a finding that the requested use is nevertheless reasonable and beneficial. Furthermore,the applicant: 1. Is obligated to demonstrate affirmatively that the proposed use will not affect a protected use; 2. Must demonstrate the absence of a practicable alternative water source; and 3. If the impact is found to be reasonable and beneficial,then in light of the cumulative impact of existing and proposed diversions on trust purposes, must implement reasonable measures to mitigate this impact. The use of groundwater to sustain homes in this area zoned by the County and State for housing is a reasonable and beneficial use, and the measures the applicant proposes to be required as a condition of permits are both the maximum measures feasible and will effectively protect the water H resources from harm. Fil AIR QUALITY AND NOISE Over the last thirty years, air pollution in West Hawaii has mainly come from volcanic emissions F of sulfur dioxide, which convert into particulate sulfate and produce a volcanic haze (vog) from Kilauea. Vog has persistently blanketed North and South Kona,at least until the cessation(perhaps temporary) of volcanic activity on Kilauea in August 2018. However, air quality in Kohala has been generally good, with the most noticeable degradation occurring when occasional southerly U winds would carry vog into the area. U, Noise on the property is low to moderate and is derived principally from roadway noise from the adjacent Akoni Pule Highway, as well as activities on developed land mauka of the highway. Li U 65 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Impacts and Mitigation Measures Construction of the project will involve excavation, grading, compressors, vehicle and equipment engine operation, and construction of new infrastructure. These activities have the potential to F7 generate noise exceeding 95 decibels at times, impacting nearby sensitive noise receptors on the margins of the development. Whenever construction noise is expected to exceed the DOH's' "maximum permissible" property—line noise levels, contractors will be required to consult with DOH per Title 11, Chapter 46, HAR (Community Noise Control) prior to construction. DOH would then review the proposed activity, location, equipment, project purpose and timetable in order to decide whether a permit is necessary and what conditions and mitigation measures, such as restriction of equipment type, maintenance requirements, restricted hours, and portable noise barriers, will be necessary. The contractor would consult with DOH to determine whether permit restrictions would consist of construction being limited to daylight hours. Ll LOn a permanent basis, future legal uses of the properties for single-family residences will also 111 generate noise consistent with expectations and allowable limits in areas zoned for these uses, U which is thus not considered an adverse impact. R Li HAZARDOUS MATERIALS,TOXIC SUBSTANCES AND HAZARDOUS CONDITIONS UNo Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed for the site,as there was no information on the presence of hazardous materials or toxic substances on the property. No conditions or i Li activities that would lead to such site contamination are known to be present or are expected to be present on the property. The property does not contain quarries, former explosives sites, or other hazardous conditions. The property is vacant and does not appear to have undergone any active Li land use in modem times. Although the property has been grazed,no farming has been conducted in modem times,and there is no known use that would have involved pesticides or industrial uses. An abandoned vehicle and litter from Akoni Pule Highway are present, but the history of the site and its surroundings as understood by the owner does not suggest the presence of hazardous materials or toxic substances. State databases did not indicate any Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUST's), or records of incidents or releases on the site or in surrounding properties (https://eha-cloud.doh.hawaii.gov/iheer/#!/viewer). Although it 66 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM is unlikely that any potentially hazardous,toxic or radioactive waste would be found on the project site, reasonable precautions would be undertaken by contractors in the context of the project construction Best Management Practices for the appropriate response and remediation should any such hazardous,toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during construction of the project. HISTORIC RESOURCES: An archaeological inventory survey report addressing all archaeological sites on the property was performed by ASM Affiliates. The report was finalized in January 2016 and approved by the State Historic Preservation Division in February 2016. The AIS is an update on an earlier survey Ll prepared for a different project plan by Graves and Franklin in 1998. Because the previous AIS was predicated on the construction of only one residence on the property and had incompletely n, recorded certain sites, an updated survey was required. The 2016 survey is included in EA Appendix 4,which begins with the February 8, 2016 letter approving the AIS, and a December 8, 2018 letter to the SHPD with revised treatment recommendations based on a reduced development footprint,which will allow preservation rather than data recovery for certain sites. Ul At least eight archaeological studies of the property have been conducted since 1985, when M. Allen carried out a pair of limited archaeological reconnaissance surveys. Others include a data recovery plan for one archaeological site (Rosendahl 1994), an archaeological inventory survey L (Graves and Franklin 1998),and data recovery excavations(O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999). Burial F) and site preservation plans were also prepared (PM 2000), followed by additional testing of burial features in 2005. Other archaeological studies performed in the area of the property include three conducted in 1964 (Soehren), and 1968 (Bonk). L Beginning in 2010, initial fieldwork for the current archaeological inventory survey by Rechtman Consulting (the predecessor to ASM Affiliates, Inc.), was conducted, followed by additional survey, subsurface testing at selected features, and further review of historic maps. The work identified all of the 39 archaeological sites previously recorded and refined the site descriptions for five of those sites. The latter included a corrected location and characterization of Feature D at Site 2496, a previously unrecorded rock shelter feature at Site 4013, a previously unrecorded 67 L U j Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of'Zone and SMA rn -J rough terrace feature at Site 161331, an unrecorded northern extension of Site 16147, and an r unrecorded marine shell scatter at Site 16151. Additionally, a portion of the previously LJ undocumented Site 29271—the ala loa coastal trail/Jeep road,commonly labeled the"Mahukona- �i Kawaihae Trail" on maps produced prior to 1931 was recorded across the property. The 40 archaeological sites are mapped in Figure 10 and summarized in Table 6. �i `_J Impacts and Mitigation Measures As a result of the current AIS, the original significance evaluation made by Graves and Franklin u in 1998 and adopted in the subsequent DLNR-SHPD determination (DOC NO.: 9805PM21) has been recommended for modification for five of the previously recorded sites. Four of these(Sites 'LJ 4000, 4010, 16132, and 16138) were not considered to be significant in the original study; however, all these sites are part of a relatively intact archaeological landscape that documents (_J evolving land use from Precontact times to the late Historic Period. As such, all four of these sites n are now considered to be significant under Criterion D for their information content. Further, Site �J 2496 was originally determined to be significant solely under Criterion D; however, as this site is now known to contain a burial, it should also be considered significant under Criterion E. When the 2015 nine-lot subdivision was proposed, site treatments were reconsidered and plans were C� made to revise existing data recovery,preservation and burial treatment plans. With the reduction J of the proposal to six lots, with no development makai of the ala loaJeep road, recommended l treatments have been further revised, and future data recovery, preservation and burial treatment Li plans will be further updated. n U The four previously identified burial sites (Sites 4004, 4013, 16148, and 16162) shall continue to be preserved. in conformance with the recommendation of the latest archaeological inventory survey, the burial treatment plan(PHRI 2000a)will be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use and the newly identified burial site(Site 2496 Feature D). The 2000 burial plan had noted that any subsequent change in the project's components could require that the applicant return to the Hawaii Island Burial Council for review of proposed preservation measures. The 2016 AIS recommended data recovery for 16 sites,plus portions of two additional sites(2496 and 4013)that contain preserved burial features. All those sites were previously approved for data 68 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA recovery based on the Graves and Franklin survey with the exception of Sites 4010 and 16138, which were earlier approved for no further work. It is believed that these two sites still retain n information that could be recovered and aid in developing a specific chronology of land-use history LJ for the project area. As noted in Table 5 below, eleven archaeological sites (SIBP Sites 2496, Pi 4010, 4012, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146, 16151, and 16167) that have been previously approved for data recovery by DLNR-SHPD will be reassigned a preservation 01 treatment,reducing the total number of sites that will be subject to data recovery from eighteen to seven and increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen to twenty-seven. Pursuant to HAR 13-278,a plan addressing the data recovery of the seven sites will be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and approval. U P, n F U F) Li U LI 69 U, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA ii LJ Figure 10. Archaeological Sites 0 40 80 Seasonal drainage i-- IExisting dirt roads Scale in Meters N Archaeological features Owe burial features in Ted Old i kcp)Tizil in-,-,otid bluc odwr lrad�'i rCPx-I:sn1t0d b%, &vsheIJ blue lines) Bulldozed area LJ 40 3 1611 D r 16161 i Lj B 4015 i ',, 401.tQ MO �7 4010 16637 Ij 5261-B - -1616. 16134 &1613. 16136 B 0 �0 DVn 0A C D 1613E rlr 4005 003 Terrace not mentioned *wF2927 I-C in site description 16131 4(X,2 ll 3C'M9'YPh" A 6149 ti16149 16139 4000 16148A,, .C." Li Pacific Oceall1.,b .olbI46 149 45 1 164 1 6140. RY41 Marine shell scatter and alignmmen /A616 L not mentioned in site description 1614? 161 U0 ., 16 43 116M B CA16 IM42 G Marine shell scatter not mentioned in site description Note:Map notes indicate features not noted in surveys prior to 2010 70 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Table 5. Archaeological Sites SIB? Site Type Age Significance Recommended Treatment Site No. F1 2496 Habitation/Burial P D,E* Preservation/Burial Preservation (J 2498 Habitation/Ceremonial P C,D,E Preservation 2499 Habitation P/H C,D Preservation 4000 Wall P/H D** Preservation 4002 Rock Mound P D Data Recovery 4003 Habitation P/H D Data Recovery 4004 Burial P/H D,E Burial Preservation U 4005 Habitation P/H C,D Preservation 4010 Animal Enclosure H D** Preservation 4011 Habitation P/H D Preservation LJ 4012 Habitation P/H D Preservation 4013 Habitation/Burial P/H D, E Data Recovery/Burial M Preservation 4015 Habitation P D Data Recovery Completed 15261 Trail P/H D,E No Further Work 16131 Habitation P/H D Preservation I Lil 16132 Wall H D** No Further Work 16133 Well/Reservoir H D Preservation 16134 Enclosure H D Preservation 16135 Wall P D Data Recovery 16136 Habitation P D No Further Work 16137 Rock Mound P D Data Recovery 16138 Platform and Cairn P D** Preservation 16139 Habitation P D Preservation 16140 Habitation P D Preservation 16141 Habitation P D Preservation 16142 Habitation P D Preservation 16143 Habitation P D Preservation 1j i 16144 Habitation P D Preservation 16145 Habitation P, D Preservation 16146 Habitation P D Preservation 16147 Habitation P D Preservation 16148 Habitation/Burial P D,E Burial Preservation 16149 Habitation P D Preservation 16150 Habitation P D Data Recovery 16151 Habitation P D Preservation 16162 Burial P D,E Burial Preservation 16163 Habitation P D Preservation 16164 Habitation P D Data Recovery 16167 Agricultural Terrace P/H D Preservation I U 29271 Trail P/H D,E Preservation"* Age:P—Precontact;H—Historic.Significance Criteria:A-Associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history;B -Associated with the lives of persons important in our past;C -Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period or method of construction;represent the work of a master;or possess high artistic value;D-Have yielded,or be likely to yield,information important for research 71 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM on prehistory or history;E-Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts,these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. *Criterion E added because a burial was found at this site during the current study. **These sites are considered significant under Criterion D in the current study;they were determined to not be significant in the earlier inventory. ***In conformance with standard treatments for linear features such as trails,roads and certain walls,the preservation plan for the trail will accommodate breaches for the mauka-makai public access trail. Preservation is now recommended for 27 sites, all but one of which(Site 4000)was approved for F data recovery based on the original inventory survey.A new preservation plan that addresses these 27 sites will be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and compliance. it SHPD approved the AIS for the project per letter of February 6, 2016 (see Appendix 4). The F11 project archaeologist wrote SHPD on December 8,2018,with revised treatment recommendations Li based on a reduced development footprint,which will allow preservation rather than data recovery for certain sites. By letter of June 3,2019, SHPD agreed to revision of the mitigation commitment from data recovery to preservation for these sites(see EA Appendix 4). In addition to development and implementation of data recovery, preservation and burial treatment plans, the project has involved continuing consultation with native Hawaiian individuals and organizations,as discussed Ci in the previous section. Continued consultation with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs will occur with respect to all archaeological sites determined significant under Criterion e. Ll SMA 379 and Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following: • SMA Condition 10 and Rezoning Ordinance Condition M: A Data Recovery Plan and Preservation Plan shall be prepared for the review and approval by the Planning Director in consultation with the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-BPD). Proposed mitigation treatment (preservation in place or Disinterment-reinterment) for burial sites must be approved by the Historic Preservation Division's Hawaii Island Burial Council before detailed mitigation plans are finalized for these sites. A copy of the approved Final Data Recovery Plan and Preservation Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for its files prior to submitting plans for subdivision review and prior to any approval for any land alteration permits. 72 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and S1J i AIM • SMA Condition 11 and Rezoning Ordinance Condition N: Should any 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 F-1 Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from the SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigative measures have been taken. Similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit and the Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a, which can help mitigate any impacts to archaeological and cultural resources of the property. It should be noted that extensive consultation has occurred, and is slated to continue to occur, throughout this project's development. Ell NATURAL RESOURCES: FLORA,FAUNA AND ECOSYSTEMS A terrestrial biological survey was conducted at several times between 2010 and 2018 by Ron Terry, Ph.D., the results of which are presented in EA Appendix 2 and summarized below. Prior Ll work in the offshore waters off the property documented in Marine Research Consultants (MRC 2010), with additional unpublished survey work done in 2015, evaluated nearshore water chemistry and assessed impacts of altering groundwater quality and chemistry,providing the basis C-1 for the analysis in this section.' U EXISTING TERRESTRIAL BIOLOGY U As typical for the region,the property is thickly covered with alien vegetation. Virtually the entire site is dominated by a low forest of scattered kiawe(Prosopis pallida)with an understory of buffel Li grass (Cenchrus ciliaris). A total of 30 plant species was identified(Table 4). Only four common plants, the roadside herb 'uhaloa (Waltheria indica), the cherished yellow-flowered 'ilima (Sides Li I fallax), the shoreline succulent 'akulikuli (Sesuvium portulacastrum), and the strand vine pa'i! 0 Hi'iaka (Jacquemontia ovalifolia), are indigenous to the Hawaiian Islands. All plant species L 73 LEl F] Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIM L observed in the survey are listed in Table 3 below. No threatened or endangered plant species (USFWS 2019) are present or would be expected on the property. Furthermore, no plant critical habitat is present on the property or within four miles of the property (https:Hecos.fvvs.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html). The closest plant critical habitat is at L-J above 2,000 feet in elevation in the Kohala Mountains. FAUNA The mammalian fauna of the project area is composed mainly of introduced species, including small Indian mongooses(Herpestes a. auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis cattus),roof rats(Rattus r. 17, rattus), Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus), European house mice (Mus domesticus) and possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis). None are of conservation concern and all are r--J deleterious to native flora and fauna. U I L 1 L L i . 74 L L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM r, F Table 4. Plant Species on Property Scientific Name Family Common Name Life Form -Status* Abutilon incanum Malvaceae Hoary abutilon Herb A P Atriplex semibaccata Chenopodiaceae Australian saltbush Herb A Boerhavia coccinea Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia Herb A Cenchrus ciliaris Poaceae Buffel grass Grass A Fj Cenchrus setaceus Poaceae Fountain grass Grass A Chamaesyce hirta Euphorbiaceae Garden spurge Shrub A Chenopodium murale Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Herb A Cleome gynandra Capparaceae Spider Rower Herb A Commelina benghalensis Commelinaceae Hairy honohono Herb A Cucumis dipsaceus Cucurbitaceae Hedgehog gourd Vine A Desmodium sp. Fabaceae Desmodiurn Vine A Eragrostis amabilis Poaceae _ Love ass Grass A Festuca bromoides Poaceae Brome fescue Grass A Ficus microcarpa Moraceae Chinese banyan Tree A Jacquemontia ovalifolia Convolvulaceae Pa'fl 0 Hi'iaka Vine I Lantana camara Verbenaceae Lantana Shrub A �, Leonotis nepetifolia Larniaceae Lion's ear Herb A Leucaena leucocephala Fabaceae Haole koa Tree A Merremia aetia Convolvulaceae Hairy merremia Vine A C� Portulaca o eracea Portulacaceae Pigweed Herb A Portulacapilosa Portulacaceae Portulaca Herb A Prosopis pallida Fabaceae Kiawe Tree A Ricinus communis Euphorbiaceae Castor bean Shrub A Sesuvium portulacastrum Aizoaceae Akulikuli Herb I Sidafallax Malvaceae 'Ilima Shrub I Sida rhombifolia Malvaceae Broom weed Herb A Spergula arvensis Caryophyllaceae Com spurry Herb A F1 Verbesina encelioides Asteraceae Golden crown beard Herb A Tribulus terrestris Zygophyllaceae Puncture vine Herb A Waltheria indica FSterculiaceae 'Uhaloa Herb A=alien;I=indigenous;botanical names follow Wagner,Herbst and Sohmer 1990,as updated. Almost all birds seen on the site were wide-ranging aliens such as common mynas (Acridotheres tristis), yellow-billed cardinals (Paroaria capitata), saffron finches (Sicalis flaveola), gray francolins (Francolinus pondicerianus) and zebra doves (Geopelia striata). Other than the common shorebird'ulili or wandering tattler(Heteroscelus incanus)and the Pacific golden-plover or kolea (Pluvialisfulva), which were observed right on the shoreline rocks, no birds indigenous to Hawaii were identified during the survey. No critical habitat (https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html) for terrestrial fauna is present in the area, but some endangered species may overfly this and all other areas of the 75 IuI Pi Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM U1 F11 Island of Hawaii. The Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), the Hawaiian sub-species of Newell's shearwater (Puffinus newelli), and the band-rumped storm-petrel (Oceanodroma castro)have been recorded over-flying various areas on the Island of Hawaii between late April and the middle of December each year. The Hawaiian petrel and band-rumped storm-petrel are listed as endangered, and Newell's shearwater as threatened, under both federal and State of Hawaii endangered species statutes. These seabirds hunt over the ocean during the day and fly to higher elevations at night to roost and nest. The Hawaiian petrel and the band-rumped storm petrel are known to nest at elevations well above 5,000 feet on the Big Island,nowhere near the property. But during it breeding season from April through November, the Newell's shearwater burrows under ferns on forested mountain slopes. These burrows are used year after year and usually by Lj the same pair of birds. Although capable of climbing shrubs and trees before taking flight,it needs F-1 an open downhill flight path through which it can become airborne. Once abundant on all the main Hawaiian Islands, most Newell's shearwaters are today found in the steep terrain between 500 to I F-1 2,300 feet on Kaua'i(https://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/fauna/newellsshearwater.htrnl). The primary cause of mortality for all three species in Hawaii is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the nesting colonies. Collision with man-made structures is another significant cause. Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their way to sea in the L; summer and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Disoriented seabirds may collide Pwith manmade structures and, if not killed outright, become easy targets of predatory mammals. I I Lj These listed seabirds would not directly utilize the property but could occasionally overfly it. LJ The only native Hawaiian land mammal,the Hawaiian hoary bat(Lasiurus cinereus semotus),may also occur in the area,as it has been observed in almost all parts of the island of Hawaii. Although L the sparse kiawe-buffel grass vegetation of the site does not represent essential habitat for this r__1 I L I endangered species, bats have been observed in kiawe scrub vegetation in other parts of West Hawaii, and are undoubtedly present at least occasionally. L 76 I L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Terrestrial Biology In order to frame impacts to terrestrial flora and fauna, it is relevant that the property has been historically used for ranching, has been intensely affected by wildfire and is dominated by introduced plant species. As illustrated in Figure 4, the project will include gradual planting of native plants around homes near the shoreline with the intent to restore native species to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the area. The plants envisioned—including pohuehue (Ipomoeapes-caprae), pd'i!-O-Hi'iaka (Jacquemontia ovalio lia), 'ilima (Sidafallax), f 6helo kai (Lyc ium sandwicense), akulikuli (Sesuvium portulacastrum), hinahina (Heliotropium anomalum) and kauna'oa(Cuscuta sandwichiana)—were selected because they were observed to be thriving on the site and/or in nearby areas without benefit of irrigation. Although low-lying and often grayish green and inconspicuous, with small flowers and fruit, they represent the natural vegetation and have rich cultural associations as well. These plants can be slowly added with gradual effort. Considering the existing environment and planned improvements to the flora, the development will produce almost no impacts to any species of flora and fauna other than the alien species already present. However, several mitigation measures that protect wide-ranging endangered animal species are recommended. To minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, initial infrastructure contract conditions and homeowner construction CC&Rs will prohibit removal or trimming of woody plants taller than 15 feet from June 1 to September 15 each year. This period is the most vulnerable time in the bat birthing and pup rearing season,and refraining from vegetation removal or trimming is recognized as appropriate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in recent Endangered Species Act consultations (e.g., see Hawaii State DHHL 2009). Outdoor lighting at homes can attract threatened or endangered seabirds, which may become disoriented by the lighting, resulting in downed birds. To avoid the potential downing of these seabirds by interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting will be permitted after dark between the months of April and October. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance(Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. 77 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA EXISTING MARINE BIOTA Overall, the biotic composition of the coral reef communities as revealed during intensive J investigation of three transects fronting the property conforms to the typical zonation pattern that has been well documented for the West Hawaii area(Dollar 1983,Dollar and Tribble 1992,MRC 2010). The majority of the shoreline throughout the property is composed of wave-cut vertical basaltic cliffs several meters high that extend below the waterline for an additional several meters, IJP forming the intertidal zone. In several locations that are the shoreline termini of intermittent streams,the shoreline is composed of small beaches covered with boulders and rounded rocks. At these locales, the boulders continue through the nearshore area. The nearshore boulders are essentially devoid of macrobenthos, probably as a result of rolling during periods of large waves breaking on the shoreline. L! In areas where boulders do not occur, the reef zone nearest to shore consists of submerged basaltic L71 spurs and outcrops that are colonized primarily by the hemispherical branching coral Pocillopora meandrina. This coral has been termed a "pioneering" species in that it is generally the first to settle on newly bared substratum and is often the only coral that has the ability to withstand the physical rigor of water movement within the nearshore zone. It is also of note that unlike many other species of reef building coral,Pocillopora meandrina has a"determinate"life history in that it only grows to maximum size or age before colonies die. Hence, natural communities of this n species are often composed of a mixture of live colonies and dead skeletal remains. The other common macroinvertebrates that occupy the nearshore zone are the boring sea urchins L Echinometra matheai and Echinostrephus aciculatus. These urchins are major bioeroders on the F71 11 rock surfaces and are found in pits that are ground out of the basalt. Beginning at approximately 35 feet from the shoreline cliffs, the bottom is composed of a basalt platform that extends from depths of about 15 feet to about 30 feet. Off the property, the reef platform is nearly completely covered with growth of living corals. The two species that cover of the platform are helmet-shaped lobed colonies of Porites lobata and finely branching mats of Porites compressa. Density of Porites lobata is highest near the shoreline, with gradually increasing proportions of P. compressa in the offshore direction. The solid reef structure of the 78 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM platform contains intermittent pockets and channels of coarse white sand. In the 2010 survey(MRC Ell 2010), there was no evidence of any type of damage or environmental impacts (e.g., bleaching, disease) throughout the range of the survey. While species of the genus Porites dominated coral cover on the reef platform, several other species were observed in very low density, including Montipora patula, M capitata and Pavona varians. There were no observations of any stands of macroalgae on the reef platform. Communities of reef fish were also typical of West Hawaii,with few observations of large fish that would be categorized as target species for spearfishers. Subsequent to the re-evaluation of marine community structure in March 2015, a major bleaching event occurred throughout much the world's tropical oceans in the summer of 2015. Many Hawaiian reefs have been subjected to anomalously warm water resulting in unprecedented bleaching of corals, including the reefs of West Hawaii. Fortunately, corals often recover when the temperature stress is removed. Surveys of coral communities statewide are documenting the level of impact to coral communities resulting from the bleaching event, as well as the progress of recovery from this latest event, as indicated in a study by The Nature Conservancy (https://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/01/23/breaking-news/nature-conservangy-survey-finds- hawaii-island-reefs-under-recovery/accessed January 2019). Unfortunately,the steady increase in ocean temperature and acidification that is occurring with climate change will likely lead to longer and more intense bleaching episodes in the future,which is of grave concern. At approximately the 30-foot depth,the gently sloping reef platform terminates at an edge marked by a sharply increasing angle of the bottom. Coral community structure near the shelf break and on the shelf slope is composed primarily of solid interconnected mats of finely branched Porites compressa,which is commonly known as finger coral. As with the reef platform,no frondose algae were observed on the reef slope. At a depth of approximately 60 feet, the reef slope and mats of finger coral terminate in a sand plain with corals growing on isolated rocks and rock rubble. The overall coral community composition off the project site can be characterized as a near-climax successional stage of Hawaiian reef development. Living coral of two species virtually covered the entire hard bottom on the reef platform and slope, eliminating competition for space for other coral species or other forms of bottom cover. The near complete cover indicates that the area is 79 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM well protected from natural stresses,particularly the storm waves that are the major determinate of community structure on reefs in Hawaii. L 71 Coastal waters and beaches of the Kona and Kohala coasts are well-documented feeding areas for U endangered green sea turtles(Chelonia mydas). Also seen occasionally are endangered Hawaiian Ell hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) and Hawaiian monk seals (Monachus schauinslandi). The waters surrounding the entire Big Island are critical habitat for the monk seal. THE IWACT OF SEDIMENT One of the transects in the marine studies that is 2,000 feet south of the property, adjacent to a Li gulch,had high runoff in 2009 and 2010(MRC 20 10)and again in 2015 (MRC,unpublished data). F1 Inspection here provided an opportunity to review the response of the marine environment to Li extreme sediment events. A scenario that likely occurs in this area is that intermittent heavy rainfall Uresults in discharge of sediment-laden water at the shoreline. This sediment settles out in the nearshore region and may be of a magnitude to smother corals situated on the rocky bottom. Following the storm event,normal wave action flushes the sediment from the area,re-exposing the boulder surfaces. If corals previously inhabiting the rocks are smothered and killed,the remaining skeletons may be bioeroded from the rock surface or removed by wave impacts. Following the removal of sediment, rock surfaces are suitable for settlement of new colonies, which is the stage observed during the present survey. Growth of these new recruits continues until another episode of sediment input occurs. Hence,if there is a relatively small interval between incidents of sediment Ii i input, the nearshore zone may remain essentially devoid of mature coral colonies. However, if there is a period between episodes of sediment input that is long, relative to the growth cycle of corals,the new recruiting corals may develop into larger "mature" colonies. Within this scenario L (7 is the compounding effect of stress from wave energy. Once colonies reach a certain size, impacts from extreme wave forces may limit development. In any event,it is evident that coral community structure is dynamic in nature, and dependent on the magnitude of natural stresses, and the interaction between these stresses. 80 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Comments from the DLNR-Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR) of August 2, 2015, in response to the Draft EA for the original Kohala Shoreline Project (Kohala Shoreline LLC 2015) indicated a different assessment of the health of the aquatic biota in this area. DAR stated that: The proposed project site is one of the areas where extensive sedimentation onto to the nearshore reef has negatively impacted the adjacent coral reef community. This was first documented in October 2006 One of the most heavily impacted reef areas was directly shoreward of Keawewai Gulch which runs right through the subject property. Sediment 0 impacts were noted down to at least 70 feet. The Keawewai impacted site was subsequently revisited five additional times with an accumulation of sediment and dead corals noted as F11 recently as August 2010, the most recent site visit. Given the above observations it is quite perplexing as to why the March 2010 Assessment of Marine Water Chemistry and Marine Biotic Communities by Marine Research Consultants, Inc.failed to report any accumulated sediments or impacted corals in their report which was done five months prior to the last DAR site visit (August 2010). Indeed, they note that "Effects to reef structure from substantial sediment input are not evident throughout the area fronting the Kohala Shoreline LLC property." This is also mirrored 1J I in the DEA itself which states "Overall, the water off the project site is very clear and clean, with no apparent human-induced pollution problems." However, the consultant found that on transects within 50 m of the shoreline most of the values of turbidity exceed DOH water quality standards. Such turbidity is also reflected in a 2015 Goggle [sic]Earth image of the shoreline area which apparently shows suspended sediments in the near shore waters. DAR has two long-term coral reef monitoring sites in the vicinity of the project site at Waiaka'ilioBay. One is almost directly offshore of the northern boundary of the proposed project while the other (Kamilo) is one ha6C mile to the north. At both of these sites the percentage of live coral cover on the reef has substantially and significantly declined over the past 16 years. At Waiaka'ilio, coral cover has decreased 11.3%while at Kamilo, it has decreased 14.6/. These findings point out the continued stress the coral reef in these areas 81 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA -% is facing and the need to be highly proactive in any activities that may further stress these communities. Given these very real concerns, the project needs to ensure that Best Management Practices EJ are strictly followed, if not exceeded, in all areas of site development and construction. Special attention should be focused on not further exacerbating erosional issues with Id Keawewai Gulch and partnering with Kohala Ranch to ensure upland land use practices do not impact water quality and nearshore marine communities. _J ( These concerns should be framed in the context of trends that DAR has been closely monitoring I� over the last 15 years. A recent assessment summarized this as follows: Ecosystem indicators compiled for coral reef fishes have shown an overall trend towards a community of smaller, more abundant fishes. From 2003 to 2014, mean fish length, an indicator of adult reef fish size structure, has shown a decreasing trend in both the North and South regions of West Hawai`i.... Similarly, total fish biomass, an indicator of the entire fish community size, declined by—20% in the North over the same time frame while in the El South, no overall net change was observed. Herbivorous fishes, which are important for coral reef ecosystem resilience, have also declined in biomass across West Hawaii over 1 the past 12 years....Redlip Parrotfish.... a targeted herbivorous fish, is currently (2014) at a level of biomass that is considerably lower compared to the maximum biomass observed Ell" in 2007 and 2004 for the North and South regions, respectively. In contrast to the observed declines in the overall size structure of reeffishes tshes in West Hawaii, total fish abundance has rlrl shown an increasing trend over the same time period, while juvenile yellow tang, which comprise —85% of the total aquarium fish catch, increased approximately three- to four- U fold and are presently at the highest density levels since monitoring began in 1999. Fi Ecosystem indicators related to benthic reef community integrity indicate a shift in West Hawai`i towards lowered reef accretion and reduced structural complexity. Hard coral cover, an indicator of reef topographic complexity, habitat structure, and reef accretion, 82 j- Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA decreasedfrom an average of 44%to 31%cover in the North from 2003 to 2014, a decline of roughly one-third in. ust 12 years (PIFSC 2016: i-ii). The causes for this decline are complex and interwoven: The population of Hawai'i Island has increased by 320% in the last 56 years, increasing pressures on the marine environment such as coastal development, habitat degradation, fishing pressure, and nutrient pollution. Human wastewater,for example, is principally disposed via on-site waste disposal systems in West Hawai'i. Cesspools —where effluent receives no treatment prior to being released into the environment— comprise 85% of all on-site waste disposal systems in the region. Cesspools leech excess pollution and nutrients into groundwater thatflows to the ocean, threatening human health and degrading marine ecosystem integrity. The total number of on-site waste disposal systems in West Hawai'i nearly doubled from 1995 to 2010 (PIFSC 2016: i). Because these comments and research are from an agency charged with assessing and protecting the aquatic environment in Hawaii, Kohala Shoreline requested additional survey and analysis to ascertain the reasons for the differences in assessment of the health of the aquatic biota between DAR and MRC. MRC was asked to inspect of the offshore area again in 2015. Their survey indicated no significant changes from 2009 and 2010 and revealed the same processes of episodic sediment input. Coral recruitment and growth had continued. MRC concluded that the offshore reef remained relatively unaffected in any permanent way by sediment input at the shoreline. The fundamental difference between the two assessments is that DAR's position stresses that the order of magnitude of sediment input from the gulches of North Kohala is a recent and largely anthropogenic condition to which the local coral and other biota have not been able to adapt. This opinion is based on a series of marine surveys that clearly show high levels of sedimentation,trash and organic debris littering the ocean, coupled with field visits to sites in the drainage basin that revealed highly inadequate sediment control measures associated with some development and land F1 use. This is particularly important because it is combined with other causes of coral reef decline. Li N4RC's contention is that while periodic sedimentation events do affect nearshore areas, and some 83 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA events are exacerbated(or even wholly caused)by human action,which induces locally substantial but temporary damage, sedimentation events are basically normal processes that shape marine communities. In this particular environment,the communities are resilient enough to recover from r—J most sedimentation events. The gulches of the Kohala Mountains, which long precede human presence on the island, are the result of steady erosion, the sediment products of which have been deposited in the shoreline area for millennia. The gulches that pass through the property were carved out over geologic time by flood events that carry sediment laden water. The marine environment is adapted to such long-term periodic stress from sedimentation events, but human contributions should nonetheless be minimized. U The differences between these perspectives is interesting and important,but all parties involved are likely in agreement concerning several points: PJJ1. In the big picture in North Kohala,the main culprit responsible for excessive sedimentation is overgrazing by cattle and feral ungulates on typically dry lands. When combined with El the twin and interrelated scourges of wildfire and fire-adapted alien grasses, sediment discharge to the ocean following periodic severe rainfall events can be substantial. EInadequate sediment control measures during development and urban land uses that are inexcusable and often illegal add to this problem. 2. The vast majority of the sediment in gulches on the Kohala Shoreline property originates in the 97% plus of the gulch drainage basins that are mauka of Akoni Pule Highway. Only Li the last few hundred yards of these seven-mile long gulches pass through the property itself, which is currently in an entirely natural condition, albeit affected by feral goats, alien Ell grasses and periodic wildfires. 3. Regardless of the adaptability of the coral communities offshore to sedimentation, there is La need to avoid any additional sedimentation from the proposed subdivision, and, in fact,to reduce it from existing levels to the greatest level feasible. Whatever the degree of the Lresilience of the coral ecosystem,home development should not be allowed to test it. 4. Climate change, particularly warmer and more acidic ocean waters that lead to coral bleaching, is the greatest threat to the coral ecosystem. All development needs to utilize design and technologies that help stem global warming. 84 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Marine Biota The health of the marine community is directly tied to water quality. For this among other reasons, reason, the 6-lot subdivision project currently reduced the number of homes from previous proposals over the years,which had between 9 and 50 homes. Even more importantly,the project features a requirement for advanced treatment unit septic systems that can minimize nutrients. As a result,the predicted changes in water quality constituents detailed above are negligible(less than a half percent) and within the natural variability of the groundwater-marine water mixing regime. In fact,the groundwater in this area will continue to have nutrient concentrations far below typical natural concentrations in West Hawaii. Notably,the subsidies of nutrients are small in comparison to other documented situations in West Hawaii where anthropogenic inputs have been quantified. For example, leaching of golf course nutrients resulted in an increase over natural flux of about 116%N and 22%P to a semi-enclosed embayment(Keauhou Bay). While these increases are orders of magnitude greater than predicted at the property,there was no measurable nutrient uptake within Keauhou Bay, and no alteration of biotic composition(Dollar and Atkinson 1992). Similarly,nutrients subsidies resulted in increased N and P flux to anchialine ponds at Waikoloa of about 229% and 400%,respectively. Even with C� such high nutrient subsidies to ponds that reflect substantial nutrient subsidies to groundwater, offshore sites at Waikoloa downgradient from these ponds on wave-exposed coastlines showed no input over natural sources (Dollar and Atkinson 1992). As the wave-exposed shorelines at Waikoloa are probably less turbulent than off the property, it can be expected that the small changes in groundwater nutrient concentrations will likewise have no effect to the marine environment. In addition to consideration of the effects from nutrient additions, it is also important to consider the potential effect of sedimentation that may occur as a result of construction activities. The property is presently comprised of extensive areas of soil and rock,with relatively little vegetative groundcover, especially during droughts. As, discussed extensively above, Best Management Practices in association with grading and NPDES permits and additional BMPS based on local BMP practices as well as Low Impact Design Guidelines adapted specifically to the site will be 85 ti Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIM -' required by CC&Rs. This will limit the area of excavation at any one time,control sediment onsite, and require dust control measures. During home occupation,a host of permanent practices will be required that will drastically reduce the potential for sedimentation relative to existing conditions and unregulated site development. To summarize the discussion earlier in this section, these will (_J include gulch buffers; strict building envelopes outside of which are reserved "Natural Areas"; blending of all cut and fill slopes into the natural topography;reduction of impervious surfaces to the smallest area possible; and alternate approaches to slope retention and stabilization, utilizing LI! curved, organic forms and stone that is native to the area. Together,these will provide an ongoing check on sediment that flows into the ocean. Although development activities on the Kohala Shoreline property, if done poorly, can add slightly to these sedimentation problems, careful development can actually substantially reduce the amount of sediment that enters the ocean relative Pto the no-development condition. -11 I I All of these considerations indicate that the proposed 6-lot project will not have any significant negative, or likely even measurable, effect on marine biota in the coastal ocean offshore of the property. Projected changes in groundwater are negligible and remain well within the wide variation in nutrient concentrations of West Hawaii. This coupled with the strong mixing characteristics of the nearshore environment indicates that changes to the marine environment from added nutrients from the homes will likely be undetectable,with no measurable change from the present conditions. When combined with the features of the project that have the potential to substantially reduce property-related sedimentation currently affecting the reefs, development of the project should have no adverse effect on marine communities. SCENIC OR COASTAL RESOURCES: Waiaka'ilio Bay,on the northern end of the property(see Figures 1-3),along with the entire coastal Li I viewplane from Akoni Pule Highway, is listed in the Hawaii County General Plan as a place of natural beauty. The roughly eight-mile stretch along Akoni Pule Highway between Mahukona in the north and the 3,500-acre plus,upscale rural residential subdivision Kohala Ranch in the south, is mostly undeveloped shoreline, with highly scenic expansive vistas both mauka and makai. Hawaii State e Senate Concurrent Resolution (SCR)No. 179, H.D. 1, adopted in 1988, urged the retention of view and open space makai of Kawaihae-Mahukona-Hawi Road from Kawaihae to 86 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Upolu Point. In 2001, SCR 146 summarized the long history of public sentiment to maintain viewplanes makai of Akoni Pule Highway as expressed in legislative resolutions, petitions, and plans. SCR 146 urged the State and County of Hawaii "to work collaboratively with the community and residents of Kohala to develop and implement a plan to protect the open nature of the Kohala coast, preserve its valuable historic sites, and provide greater awareness and appreciation of the history and cultural significance of the area for residents and visitors alike." As listed within the comment letter to the Draft EA provided by Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana— Kako'o (see EA Appendix lb), there have been a number of legal challenges, petitions, government resolutions,letters, and plans that sought to preserve the open space characteristics of the North Kohala Coast in general over the last 50 years. Mitigation: SMA 379 required the following: • Condition 5 required that above ground structures would be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the mauka property line along Akoni Pule Highway to meet visual impacts concerns. • Condition 6 required a preliminary site plan that would create mauka-makai view corridors from Akoni Pule Highway would be submitted in conjunction with the subdivision plans and approved by the Planning Department. R L Condition I of Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required that all electrical and communication lines L within the subject property would be placed underground. Although the proposed six-lot subdivision is far smaller and less impactful than the project for which these conditions were approved, somewhat similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit and Rezoning Ordinance for the project. Project design will meet or exceed these conditions. The owner proposes to have all homes set back from Akoni Pule Highway by aminimum of 150 feet,and 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka U of the ala loaljeep road, with a maximum height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code. CC&Rs will require a color scheme featuring earth-tone colors to U harmonize with the existing landscape tones. As discussed above,the project will include gradual 87 1- U Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA planting of native plants near the shoreline in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the public access area. All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. Conceptual computer-generated simulations of the future appearance of the area after development have been prepared. Figures 9a and 9b, respectively,provide views from the vantages of a driver on Akoni Pule Highway and a low-flying aircraft just offshore. The point at Waiaka'ilio Bay, listed in the General Plan as an example of natural beauty, will remain visible from the highway, albeit with a mid-ground that might include a developed structure, depending on where on the highway it was viewed from. Although the six homes that would eventually be built will be visible, their visual impact potential has been minimized, and they will not appear out of character given the rural residential and agricultural lots being developed in the area surrounding the project, and the urban appearance of coastal developments just to the south and in Kawaihae. The project will maintain the view corridors and scenic resources of this coastal area, including mauka-makai and lateral views. Concern with the viewplanes was subsequently evinced in the Hawaii County General Plan and the North Kohala Community Development Plan(North Kohala CDP). The County has acquired 238 acres of shorefront property at Ka'iholena North and Pdo'o, located approximately five miles north of the property. These properties,which contain over 4,000 feet of shoreline,were identified in the North Kohala CDP as important areas for protection for recreational,historical and cultural L I reasons. The North Kohala CDP identifies the Kohala, Shoreline property on the North Kohala LJ Environmental& Cultural Concept Map (p. 25) as within or near both the "High Concentration of LCultural Sites" coastal area and the "Existing Upscale Development Area." The property and its F__; undeveloped coastline lie directly makai of the developed area of Kohala Ranch and adjacent to L the Kohala Kai agricultural subdivision. Additionally, the property is within the State Land Use Urban District and is currently zoned by the County as Single-Family Residential (RS-15). 88 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM Figure 9a Simulated View from Road �ipjf�r°✓ /f��r'; ;l'ril09rlf/,�dir /`fi(/pl�l i�,;,.;(i7 Fr ^;?i i ;i-�,; / �. p f lrr f :.fi. :.,;;,,,s„ , r.a �„i>i 1, l��%�I7i�/�;Fi,lGri N,�/� �7.9)r/%n//p�rrq/!/tl�Ulby/IA✓ /fl��/I f/'r f,;.fi/�/lei //it/%�/�di�,/f/q i,,,<,:, ,,,, ,,`, :- �rhf ��yTM "''m ✓, ” l,'7M7� '� J°Ya'Y rrr ,� y y �P ,b/�Y f �r �r�.�r �"`��rv�;N�vY ,r /f l' ���1�/i��r: /f l f y / Y 1' i fir✓lf `.0 f %Illli�i%��. y��`��/ � / .�iyi '.�I tl✓� � � IM ,.%%�` ;i;%i%���ii��'�'/%/' 'f: f%((i�/q �-'fir%ii✓/%l1/`//���!(✓,;/lII//fl ilj/i0/f'� �i% °i i" r +/Ij� r �����/li--,,�, if�i / � i /r ��91r - r fi/✓%t�/i//ii f i ff %/ 7 %r i' ,�.. �/� j/��� ! � In f ������U�✓!�i,/� rr(i��/f���/1���r /61�;//� �%/ /�i ;✓�lJ�(,�1;;, r ,r�i r/i/%p///✓/�l//li Oy��lr///i �//r/� i i, � ����f�;:,,lf;;,. /l�f/�// ✓i�r„ �� ��/i/�i� � � i//il//��/r✓ /j/ //fii� //f f Ir ��i //%�f �rlf��// ��fll� //i i7%h/i� ���fi���/f �, �r/C /i/ f�/�r/��� i��r��f��f�.. 'ill iiii�,�j?,/ /✓iG/,,� /G✓Lr v p��'o1��/.f Im..;i .,..... ! , /i,� ... ,f r, � r. Ivs� �/%� iii/iii/f%%i�i�ri�/�/i ��j,L,. /`��;;i �i�l��%�,,,� /f%✓fi�'��yr f✓llli////��/b/✓ „Ir %c�i/ a Fy,,,, Jl,'"�", f ,, �A�i/i/ // 1,/ ,i / f� , ,��f �(�1(V/2 r ? 1 f� ;J r ✓�%✓�/l�ili/✓l� lf^`r �/1/"1T�/)'e, � r 7 Figure 9b Simulated View fr®m Ocean 7 f/1//i / / ✓ r1�1//�/ F ff ry Ui r l 1 r //.✓ (elf f f�i`�Jy ,� r r✓'r r�lj Il � f, / / � f✓a� / f j,� / /fy�l ��i,,� / ”, /it �`� �✓� �:r �.rr r��� � / .. f / �// ,f r li�yY i"y/ ✓�Il1J�f� f / %l 9/i i � i / i%�1�( G f yr f;. 7�r yoi r / l���✓I �� �'�rrf iii r„ r sir 89 i Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM VALUED CULTURAL RESOURCES: An archaeological inventory survey (AIS)report and cultural impact assessment(CIA) report for the proposed action were performed by ASM Affiliates, Inc. The CIA is included in the EA as Appendix 3,and the AIS is included as EA Appendix 4. In the interest of readability,the summary below,which also is derived from other sources,has eliminated most scholarly references;readers interested in sources may consult the appendices. CULTURAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND The property is located in the ahupuaa of Kahud 1st(Kahudli'ili'i)in the district of North Kohala. The concept of the ahupuaa was established in Hawaii during the 15th century, adding a new component to what was already a well-stratified society. Ahupuaa were usually wedge or pie- shaped, encompassing all of the eco-zones from the mountains to the sea and extending several hundred yards beyond the shoreline, assuring a diverse subsistence resource base. This land unit became the equivalent of a local community,with its own social, economic and political identity. Ahupuaa were ruled by ali'i 'ai ahupuaa or lesser chiefs and managed by a konohiki. Ali`i and F�, makaainana, or commoners,were not confined to the boundaries of ahupuaa, as resources were U shared when a need was identified. Ahupuaa were further divided into smaller sections such as `ili, mooaina, paukuaina, kihapai, koele, hakuone and kuakua. The chiefs of these land units had their allegiance to a territorial chief or mo`i(often translated as king). Li 1 According to the model developed by Kirch(1985) and later revised in terms of initial settlement date(Kirch 2011), the Settlement or Colonization period of Hawaii was around A.D. 1000, with U colonists possibly from the southern Marquesas Islands. Early Hawaiian farmers developed new subsistence strategies during this period, adapting familiar patterns and traditional tools for use in their new environment. Order was kept through adherence to their ancient and ingrained philosophy of life and through the principle of genealogical seniority. According to Fornander (1969), Hawaiians brought from their homeland a variety of Polynesian customs including the major gods of Kane, Ku and Lono; the kapu system of law and order;puuhonua or places of refuge or asylum;the 'aumakua concept of a family or ancestral spirit and the concept of mana,or 90 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM spiritual power. The Development Period, which lasted from A.D. 1100-1350, brought changes that included an evolution of traditional tools as well as some distinctly Hawaiian inventions. The evolution of the adze was an example of the former, while the latter included the two-piece fishhook and the octopus-lure breadloaf sinker. Another new article was the lei Who palaoa,an item worn by those of high rank which represented a trend toward greater status differentiation. The Expansion Period from A.D. 1350 to 1650 saw an increase in social stratification and major socioeconomic changes. It also was a time of expansive settling,with the development of the most favorable windward areas as well as more marginal areas on the island's leeward side. This was the time of the greatest population growth as large irrigated field systems were developed and expanded into more and areas. Loko or fishpond aquaculture also flourished during this period. The second major migration to Hawaii also occurred during the Expansion Period, with the settlers for this expansion coming from Tahiti in the Society Islands. An increase in war marked the Proto-Historic Period(A.D. 1650-1795),both locally and between islands. Some of that warfare involved Kohala and the Kawaihae area. Shortly before this period, around 1600, the Maui chief Kamalalawalu sent spies to areas that included Kawaihae to gauge their population and how many warriors it would take to conquer the areas. According to one account: The spies sent by Kama-lala-walu went to Hawaii and landed at Kawaihae in the evening. Ka-uhi-o-ka-lani ran about that same evening and returned before the canoes were dismantled and placed in the house. The keepers of the gods at Mailekini were servants of Kama, and so they concealed the canoes of the spies...[Kamakau 1992:56]. However,during the spies'visit to Kohala,which according to Kamakau was a"thickly-populated land," they found many empty houses because most of the men were in upland areas taking part in sports competitions. Kamalalawalu's forces first defeated the residents they found in the 91 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA northern part of Kohala but when they arrived at Kawaihae they again found empty houses because their residents were attending services at Mailekini Heiau in Waimea. The grassy plains of Waimea soon became the setting for a battle between the Maui warriors and the forces of chiefs from Kohala, Waimea, Kona, Puna and Ka'ii. The combined Hawai'i Island forces slew Kamalalawalu and many of his chiefs and warriors, with the remainder making their way back to F-1 Maui. I i U North Kohala is also known as the birthplace of Kamehameha I,who was born in the ahupuaa of Kokoiki. It has been said that when he was born, an army was assembling on the leeward Kohala coast, preparing for an attack on Maui, and his birth occurred on a night filled with rain, thunder and lightning. Maui chief Kekaulike was involved at that time in a battle with Alapa'i of Kona. During the conflict, Kekaulike's men cut down trees in Kona and, according to Kamakau, all of the coconut trees in Kawaihae. According to Kamakau, he also "slaughtered the country people nof Kohala"before seizing their possessions and returning to Maui, where he soon became ill and U surrendered his power to Kamehamehanui. This period was one of continual war and strife. Ke'eaumoku set up a fort at Pololu and Honokane LJ where he was attacked by Kalaniopu'u, and then relocated to Maui. Kalaniopu'u also conquered East Maui, defeating Kamehamehanui, who was Kekaulike's successor and also Kalaniopu'u's FI: wife's brother. Kalaniopu'u. appointed one of his chiefs, Puna, to be governor of Hana and Lj Kipahulu. When Kamehamehanui died of illness in 1766, he was succeeded as Maui's king by Kahekili. At about that time, Ke'eamoku took Kamehamehanui's widow, Namahana, who was Kamehamehanui's cousin, as his wife. Their daughter, Ka'ahumanu, who would eventually J become the favorite wife of Kameharneha 1,was born in a cave at the base of Pu'u Kau'iki in 1768. L i L i In. 1775,Kalaniopu'u and his forces from Hana overran the neighboring Kaupo district and raided Moloka'i, Lana'i, Kaho'olawe and parts of West Maui. Kamehameha's efforts at the battle of Kalaeoka'ilio near Kaupo earned him recognition as a great warrior and the name of Pai'ea (meaning hard-shelled crab) from Maui chiefs and warriors. Ka'ahumanu and her parents left L Maui for Hawaii Island during the battles between Kalaniopu'u and Kahekili. 92 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA In 1790 two Western ships, the Eleanora and Fair American, were trading in Hawaiian waters. As retribution for the theft of a skiff and the murder of one of the sailors,the crew of the Eleanora massacred more than 100 natives at Olowalu,Maui. The Eleanora then sailed to Hawaii Island, and one of its crew,John Young,went ashore,where he was detained by Kamehameha. The other vessel, the Fair American, was captured by the forces of Kamehameha off the Kekaha coast and its crew was killed except for one member, Isaac Davis. Kame'eiamoku, who resided in Ka%pulebu at the time,played a lead role in this incident. He and his followers recovered several foreign arms from the Fair American, including a cannon that they called"Lopaka", all of which were turned over to Kamehameha(Kamakau 1992). Kamehameha made Young and Davis his advisors. He also kept the vessel as part of his fleet. With the aid of his new advisors,new ship, and foreign arms Kamehameha conquered Maui, and by 1796 he had conquered all the island kingdoms except Kaua'i. It wasn't until 1810, when Kaumuali'i of Kaua'i gave his allegiance to Kamehameha,that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler, Kawaihae,located three miles south of the property, eventually became one of the royal centers of the island at which Kamehameha resided, and one where he could make use of trade with foreign ships to acquire guns and ammunition. It was also the site of Pu'ukohola Heiau, dedicated to the war god Kuka'ilimoku, which Kamehameha built on the advice of a soothsayer. Subjects came from across Kamehameha's lands by the thousands to help him build the heiau. When it was completed in 1791, Kamehameha sent for Keoua, ruler of Ka'ii, who was then killed and placed within the heiau,thus cementing Kamehameha's rule over Hawaii Island. When in Kawaihae,Kamehameha stayed at Pelekane, located below Pu'ukohola. After his death in 1819,the royal residence consisted of multiple houses now occupied by his successor,Liholiho, also known as Kamehameha 11. The missionary William Ellis observed 100 houses at Kawaihae in 1823,although it was unlikely that the area's dry climate supported enough agriculture to sustain the court and its entourage as well as the commoners living there. The Journal of a Trading Voyage Around the World by an 1. Iselin gave the following account of the Kawaihae area ca. 1806: 93 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA This bay of Toeigh is very open; an extensive reef runs near it nearly level with the water, and altogether it is no inviting place to anchor at. The country around it looks like a hilly barren desert; nothing grows within ten miles of it, except a few cocoanut trees, of which afine grove stands near the beach. The inhabitants and huts are thinly scattered along the shore, far less numerous than about [Kealakekua], and seem more indigent, indeed, having to go so far for their subsistence, they are not seldom in want of the supports of life. F-) Kawaihae was described by Handy and Handy as surrounded by an and countryside: The terrain immediately around[Kawaihae] is dry and barren but formerly much U dry taro was grown beyond in the lower forest zone, which formerly extended from R the Kohala Mountains much farther seaward over what is now open pasture land. U Wet taro was grown also in small pockets of land wherever streams, even intermittent ones,flowed down from the mountains in the wet seasons. U Ellis said the coast north of Kawaihae was similarly dry: The coast was barren; the rock volcanic. The inhabitants were all fishermen. Mr. L) Thurston was informed, that the inhabitants of the plantations, about seven miles ULj! in the interiour, were far more numerous than those of the sea-shore. The historian John Papa I'i noted that fishermen traded their wares for poi at Kawaihae: I-J Soon the fishing canoes from Kawaihae, the Kana lands, and Ooma, drew close to the ship to trade for the pa`i (hard poi) carried on board, and shortly a great quantity ofaku lay silvery-hued on the deck. The fishes were cut into pieces and mashed; and all those aboard fell to and ate, the women by themselves. According to Ellis, salt was another product of the Kawaihae area: 94 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA The natives of this district manufacture large quantities of salt, by evaporating the sea water. We saw a number of their pans, in the disposition of which they display great ingenuity. During this period there was a continuation of the trend toward intensification of agriculture,ali'i- P_J controlled aquaculture,settling of upland areas and development of traditional of oral history. The Ku cult,luakini heiau and kapu system were at their peaks,but the influence of western civilization was being felt in the introduction of trade for profit and a market-system economy. By 1810, the sandalwood trade established by Europeans and Americans twenty years earlier was flourishing. El That contributed to the breakdown of the traditional subsidence system, as farmers and fishermen were required to toil at logging which resulted in food shortages and a decline in population. F1 Following the death of Kamehameha I in 1819, the customary relaxing of kapu took place. But -Li ) with the introduction of Christianity shortly thereafter,his successor,Kamehameha 11, renounced the traditional religion and ordered that heiau structures either be destroyed or left to deteriorate. The family worship of 'aumakua images was allowed to continue. The Protestant missionaries who arrived from Boston in 1820 soon were rewarded with land and government positions, as many of the ali'i were eager to assimilate Western-style dress and culture. But at the same time,the continuing sandalwood trade was becoming a heavier burden on commoners, as Ellis noted: U About eleven at night we reached Towaihae [Kawaihael, where we were kindly Ul received by Mr. Young. ... Before daylight on the 22nd. we were roused by vast F) multitudes of people passing through the district from Waimea with sandal-wood, I, which had been cut in the adjacent mountains for Karaimoku, by the people of Waimea, and which the people offohala, as far as the north point, had been ordered to bring down to his storehouse on the beach,for the purpose of its being shipped to Oahu. There were between two and three thousand men, carrying each from one to six pieces of sandal-wood, according to their size and weight. It was generally tied 95 L_) Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA - on their backs by bands of ti leaves,passed over the shoulders and under the arms, and fastened across their breasts. L r� The rampant sandalwood trade resulted in the first Hawaiian national debt, as promissory notes `- and levies granted by American traders were enforced by American warships. The assimilation of � Western ways continued with the short-lived whaling industry and commercial sugarcane, which `J was more lucrative but carried a heavy environmental price. _1 The remainder of the 19th century saw significant changes in Kawaihae as the practice of trade led n many to abandon traditional lifestyles. The result was a loss of population and resources, leaving U one observer to describe the town as a"small dreary village"entirely lacking foliage except for"a few sickly cocoa-nut trees." 1 Evidence of the earliest permanent settlement in Kohala was obtained from Koai`e,where a coastal settlement was believed to have existed as early as 1300. Inhabitants subsisted primarily on marine n resources likely supplemented by small-scale agriculture. Rosendahl (1972) proposed that early LJ settlers of the area focused on fishing and other ocean-related activities during the summer and �j farming at upland sites during the winter. n As early as the 1830s, missionaries were noting population changes in Kohala, as deaths were outpacing births. An 1835 census showed the combined population of Kahua 1st and 2nd to be 265. C But only 11 years later, during the Mahele,there was only a single person making a kuleana claim L; (small awards to commoners)in Kahuanui. n The Mahele `Aina that took place in 1848 placed all land in Hawaii into three categories: Crown Lands, Government Lands and Konohiki Lands. Ownership rights were "subject to the rights of the native tenants," or those individuals who lived on the land and worked it for their subsistence and for their chiefs. The leeward North Kohala coast south of Mo`okini Heiau has few known heiau; only three paved structures with large rock fill at Kukuipahu fit the descriptions. However, additional work and 96 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM closer scrutiny of stone platforms on crests of rises, that are sometimes associated with walled precincts, could reveal more heiau along the coastal settlements. The narrow band of habitation settlements along the coast are separated from a broader upland band of agricultural walls and habitations by a barren zone with relatively few archaeological sites. Within individual ahupuaa, trails that pass through the barren zone would have connected coastal settlements with upland fields. The width of the barren zone is inversely related to the abundance of rainfall; in the wetter north near 'Upolu Point it is about half a mile wide, and it widens to three miles in the drier south at Kahud. Surveys that have covered the uplands away from the coastline date back to the late 1960s when the University of Hawaii field schools mapped Lapakahi Ahupua'a north of U Ka'iholena Ahupua'a, using aerial photographs and surveying instruments. Vast portions of F] U Kahud I'and 2nd inland of the highway were surveyed by Hammatt and Borthwick(1986, 1987, 1990). During these upland surveys, which covered land up to the 3,000-foot elevation, U archaeologists found trail markers, scattered agricultural terraces, temporary habitation shelters, and rock walls. The remains most probably relate to the upland agricultural fields mentioned in P various oral and written histories. The ahupuaa of Kahudli'ili'i(also known as Kahud l )where the property is located was awarded to Lot Kapudiwa(Kamehameha V). However,hearings held by the Boundary Commission of the 0 Kingdom of Hawaii to determine the boundaries of Kahudli'ili'i were not held until 1873, the year following Lot Kapudiwa's death, and the ahupuaa apparently became part of the estate of L) his father, M. Kekilando'a. The boundaries were not officially established until 1903, by which time the ahupuaa had been acquired by James Woods. There were no kuleana awarded in what is now the property. UI Woods started Pu'u Hue Ranch in the early 1870s. Upon his death the ranching operations were taken over by his son,Frank Woods. By the 1920s, Woods was leasing much of the Kahud lands U to former Oahu residents Ronald Kamehameha o Ka Hae Hawaii von Holt and Herbert Montague, Richards, Sr. By 1928, von Holt and Richards had purchased the lands they formerly leased, and they began combining them with land from the Waika Ahupua'a to the south. Through purchases and leases, they eventually accumulated nearly 30,000 acres which became known as Kahud L Ranch. Von Holt died in 1953, and control of the ranch eventually passed to Herbert "Monty" � 1 97 LI i U Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Richards, Jr. In the 1980s, the ranch was divided between the two families, with the Richards operating Kahud Ranch and the von Holts controlling the southern portion that formed Ponoholo ii Ranch. Kahud Ranch sold the land that now makes up the property. Because of its and nature, the Kawaihae area was not highly populated until visits by trade and whaling ships made the bay a frequent port of call. There were no regularly flowing streams to support agriculture,which instead took place far inland. The economy of Kawaihae received a boost from the introduction of cattle ranching. Cattle from Waimea were brought to Kawaihae via a road built in 1830 and held in pens for the trip to Oahu on cattle boats. The 'trade in hides and meat also helped turn Kawaihae into a major port. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser reported up to 50 whaling ships making a port call in Kawaihae in 1857. An 1883 map showed Kawaihae with a lighthouse,wool shed,native store,jail,boat house, Fi I church and other buildings that were likely houses. Twenty years later, a plant had been built to Li manufacture soap from cattle tallow. U11 Kawaihae continued to host harbor activities, and in 1959 a new deep-draft harbor was built by the federal government. However, deposits from dredging of the shallow reef buried Kawaihae Village,its salt pans,the Kauhuhue Heiau and the majority of the coastal Land Commission awards up to 13 feet deep. Additional development in 1969 and 1970 further transformed the area into an industrial park. CULTURAL STUDIES IN THE PROJECT AREA i Li Maria E. Ka'imipono Orr(2003)prepared a cultural impact assessment for a proposed radio communication tower and facility to be placed on Pu'u Waiakanonula in the mauka portion of Kahudli'ili'i. Her study included a detailed culture-historical background for the ahupuaa. She r also conducted interviews with Sherri Hannum, Genevieve Leina'ala Hoopai, Bernard Hoopai, LJ Bernelle Hoopai, Harold Glenn Kailiawa, Hannah Springer, and Harry Martens (Pono) von Holt H. Orr(2003) concluded that no cultural properties or practices would be affected by the project, but cautioned that"for over a hundred years,native Hawaiians have lived in a culturally repressed state. It has been only within the last thirty years,due to evolved awareness,that native Hawaiians 98 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM have been aggressively trying to reclaim their wahipana (sacred and/or legendary places)." Kepa Maly prepared a detailed culture-historical background for Ka'iholena Ahupua'a (Maly 2000) that included information relative to the general region known as Kohala Waho or Outer Kohala, of which the property is a part. Maly's (2000) extensive culture-historical information suggests that the archaeological resources present on the property are best understood within the context of the larger cultural landscape of Kohala Waho; a landscape with a long history, rich in cultural traditions. One could conclude from this that the significance of any one resource is enhanced by the presence of other resources, and together form a cohesive landscape that should U be treated and managed in its totality. In L) In 2006,Rechtman Consulting prepared a cultural impact assessment for a coastal property within Kahuanui and Waikd ahupuaa adjoining the property to the south (Rechtman 2006). That property and the Kohala Shoreline property share a common history and were subject to similar land uses dating back to the Precontact settlement of the area. As part of the study,William AhYou Akau, Jr., Herbert Montague (Monty) Richards Jr., and Harry Martens (Popo) von Holt 11 were interviewed.Rechtman(2006)concluded that if the archaeological sites were treated in accordance with State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) approved treatment plans, and access to and along the shoreline was in no way inhibited,there would be no cultural impacts. Li In 2004,Rechtman Consulting prepared a cultural impact assessment(Rechtman 2004)fora small coastal parcel within Pdo'o Ahupua'a, some six miles north of the current project area. Interviewees for that study included Arthur Mahi, Isabella Mabi Medeiros, and Valerie Luhiau Ako. Collectively, the primary concerns of these individuals (all with cultural ties to the study I U I ahupua'a)revolved around the protection of the archaeological resources and the maintenance of access to the shoreline. The relevance of this study for the Kohala Shoreline project is not so much L) the specifics of Pdo'o Ahupua'a,but rather the general concept that the land needs to be cared for in appropriate ways; the concept of malama 'dina. This Pdo'o project required a Conservation Ll District Use Permit, the proceedings for which included oral and written testimony. Most of that testimony revolved around specific resources located on the Pdo'o parcel, but there was other L) testimony of a more general nature that had broader implications that should be considered when 99 U �7 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM assessing cultural impacts along this portion of the Kohala coastline. f7 I _J These included the concepts of malama 'dina,as well as cultural trauma and cultural disintegration fostering multigenerational psychopathologies. Several of those who testified suggested that home IJ construction in currently undeveloped portions of coastal Kohala would be inconsistent with the 7,,, traditional cultural practice of caring for the land (malama 'dina), although no basis for this U, assertion was cited. It should be noted that the property was utilized by generations of Hawaiians as a place of habitation as evidenced by the numerous structural remains of residential complexes LJ across the property. Testimony presented by Kamana'opono Crabbe, Ph.D. and Dr. David Liu in relation to Pdo'o with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma distinguished traditional Hawaiian use of land and modem Western use of land. There are those who assert that Fall land in Hawaii is a cultural resource and that virtually all modem development(as opposed to U traditional uses)has a severe and unmitigable cultural impact. Section 3.2.4 of the EA discusses archaeological resources in detail. While various Precontact and Historic-era archaeological sites not considered significant for preservation by SHPD are present, such features are relatively common in the area and they do not appear to have cultural value aside Lfrom their value for interpreting historic patterns. However, there are features that have greater historic value requiring preservation, including burials and several other sites associated with Phabitation. Beyond their scientific-historic value,they also have cultural value. Li CONSULTATION When assessing potential cultural impacts to resources,practices, and beliefs,input gathered from community members with genealogical ties and/or long-standing residency relationships to the study area is vital. It is precisely these individuals who ascribe meaning and value to traditional resources and practices. Community members may also retain traditional knowledge and beliefs unavailable elsewhere in the historical or cultural record of a place. Extensive consultation with Native Hawaiian agencies, individuals and organizations occurred throughout the research for the withdrawn 2015 Draft EA(Kohala Shoreline LLC 2015),a process that continued in 2018 for the preparation of the Final EA. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs in 100 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM C� Honolulu and West Hawai'i, a local Hawaiian Home Lands group, and the Hawaiian Civic Club were consulted by letter on January 10, 2010, to determine whether they had any information concerning whether cultural resources or practices might nevertheless be present. Response letters did not indicate any specific resources or practices of concern. After a hiatus in the earlier project, consultation resumed in 2014. As part of the CIA, author Robert Rechtman, Ph.D., and project representatives met with the North Kohala Community U Access Group (with whom project representatives had also met in 2010). Although this group's DI membership is multicultural, they represent many of the Native Hawaiian community's concerns with respect to access rights, and they were a forum to disseminate information about the project U within the Native Hawaiian community and to invite comments on potential resources and impacts relatedto the property. The South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Kailapa Community Association were also contacted. As a result of these contacts and communications, a field visit was set up with the intention of viewing the property and discussing any potential cultural impacts. On November 15, 2014, and January 31, 2015, Dr. Rechtman met on-site with several members of the North Kohala Community Access Group, the South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee, and residents of the Kailapa Homesteads. According to Dr. Rechtman's account of the first meeting, one attendee claimed ownership of the Li property and advised that none of the group had permission to enter the property. In the interest F] of avoiding conflict, the group decided not to visit the property. To date,there has been no legal U action filed in court by any party to assert ownership to, or any interest in the property. Also present at the aborted meeting was Kaena Peterson, who is kama'dina to the area, a resident of I Li I Kailapa, and President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club. Ms. Peterson was contacted 1­1 the following day and she requested Dr. Rechtman to meet with her and the Vice President of the U` South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club to share information about the project and hear their concerns. On November 23,2014,Dr. Rechtman met with Ms. Peterson and Lei Kihoi of the South Kohala U Hawaiian Civic Club at the Kailapa residence of Ms. Peterson. Their concerns related to the protection of trails, other traditional sites and burial sites, as well as perpetuation of access to the property for traditional and customary practices. With respect to the former,they wanted all burial 101 _ Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM sites properly treated and for traditional trail routes to remain open for unrestricted pedestrian 71 access. With respect to the perpetuation of traditional and customary practices they wanted to -' make sure that traditional coastal activities were not impacted, and that Native Hawaiian Fill individuals and organized groups such as hula halau had unrestricted access to the trails and shoreline. Both Ms.Peterson and Ms.Kihoi stressed the importance of maintaining the traditional access routes that exist on the landscape. During the second field trip conducted with members of the North Kohala Community Access Group and residents of the Kailapa Homestead in January 2015,much of the discussion revolved Ell around trails and access. Present during this visit was Jojo Tanimoto,a kupuna of Native Hawaiian ancestry. She shared recollections of traveling the project area coastline for shoreline fishing activities with her father when she was a child. Ms. Tanimoto also talked about a shoreline pond �I in the general area that William Akau told her was culturally significant,but she was unsure of its j exact location. Also present during this visit was Ms. Kaneali`i and Parish Canon of the Kailapa L� Homestead. Mr. Canon, a younger generation Native Hawaiian and current president of the Kailapa Community Association, expressed an interest in having community members take an active role in the preservation of cultural sites and resources within the development area. U At this point,the former Draft EA was published in the July 8,2015 edition of The Environmental Ell Notice. As stated previously, the project team received many comments on the Draft EA with concerns including density, lot configuration, public access, historic sites, cultural practices, drainage and water quality. The owner carefully considered the comments and decided not to implement the project as proposed and instead completely redesigned it to respond to these i concerns. The former Draft EA was formally withdrawn, and the current project was developed, with a much lower density and all building sites moved completely mauka of the ala loa, away from the shoreline. As explained in detail the next section, many more archaeological sites that were formerly slated for data recovery will now be formally preserved. Given the substantial changes, the cultural impact assessment team conducted additional consultation. This consisted of phone calls, emails and letters, and also public notices soliciting consultation for the burial sites that were published in the July 2018 issue of Ka Wai Ola o OHA, 102 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA P F1 on June 16, July 1, July 4, 2018 in both the Honolulu Star Advertiser and West Hawaii Today newspapers. The following individuals and organizations were specifically coordinated with. Kailapa Community Association, Diane Maka'ala Kdneali'i was contacted via email (on November 2 and 26, and December 8 and 10, 2018) in her capacity as Executive Director of the Kailapa Community Association. The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her and a request was made to make a presentation at a community association meeting. An arrangement was then made to facilitate an early February 2019 on-site meeting with representatives of the Kailapa Community Association and other community members. On February 2, 2019, Robert B. Rechtman, Ph.D. conducted a walking tour of the proposed subdivision area with Diane Maka'ala Kdneali'i and Cynthia Sharp. Ms. Sharp is also a board member of the Kailapa Community Association. Both Ms. Kaneali'i and Ms. Sharp expressed pleasure that the extreme coastal portion of the property will be preserved but indicated that the best approach would be to preserve the whole property through a land purchase perhaps using County Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC) funds. Short of this happening, both were encouraged by the overall limited space available for future development. Ms.Kaneali'i indicated that she would work with the owner to help establish a community stewardship program that could participate in the preservation of the cultural 0 landscape, conduct coastal clean-up, and help restore and protect archaeological resources. The owner has stated that it is committed to continued consultation with this and any other Kohala cultural community groups with respect to the long-term protection and care of the project area's cultural landscape, and the Kailapa Community Association will be further consulted with respect to the archaeological preservation plan. Hawaii Island Burial Council(HIBC). Dr.Rechtman appeared before the HIBC on November 5, 2018 to conduct preliminary consultation with respect to the five burial sites within the Li development area,and he related to the Council members that there were no responses to the public f I notices. The existing treatment plan(PHRI 2000) for four of those sites was discussed and it was U explained that a fifth site had been discovered as a result of the updated AIS (Rechtman and Clark 2010). It was also explained that the existing HIBC-approved 20-foot buffers for the sites would Li be increased to 30 feet in the new Burial Treatment Plan(BTP). Council members were pleased 103 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA with the increased buffer size and were interested in ensuring that appropriate access to the burial sites would be allowed. Provisions for such access will be included in the forthcoming BTP. J Kaena Peterson. Kaena Peterson lives in the Kailapa (Honokoa) Community and serves as the Li President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club. She was consulted during the earlier iteration of the project.Ms.Peterson was contacted again via email(on October 30 and December 8,2018). The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her and a request was made to make a presentation at a Civic Club meeting. Scheduling could not accommodate such a presentation, however, in a phone conversation (on December 11) Ms. Peterson shared that she was happy to see all development activity moved to the mauka side of the ala loa. She also strongly urged the owner to keep the current six-lot plan and not change it later to higher density and make sure that future homeowners would not encroach on the trails, which to her are at the heart of cultural practice. Ms. Peterson related that the uniqueness of living on an island comes with a kuleana toward fellow residents, something she believes was a part of traditional Hawaiian culture. Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail. Further brief consultation was conducted with Rick Gmirkin of the National Park Service's Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program. The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared via email and a brief phone conversation (on December 10, 2018) was conducted. Mr. Gmirkin expressed approval that there will be no breaches of the ala loa and that the public access to the ala loa will follow along an existing traditional maukalmakai trail alignment. He was also encouraged that the new subdivision configuration supported the EI preservation of more of the archaeological landscape, as this helps provide the context for the Ala Kahakai. The owner will continue to consult with the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program to fine-tune the public alignment of the Ala Kahakai in order to include features of the CE' F-I trail important for public use and enjoyment, as well as exclude certain significant features (e.g., L burial sites) from public interaction. LOffice of Hawaiian Affairs (OM. Shane Nelson of O'BA's West Hawaii office was contacted via email (on September 12 and October 30, 2018) and a phone conversation was arranged for IL November 5, 2018. The reduced-lot development plan was shared with Shane and he expressed his pleasure that the proposed development would have less of an impact on the cultural landscape 104 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA and the archaeological sites contained therein. Shane requested continued consultation with OHA when the burial treatment and archaeological preservation plans become available. North Kohala Community Access Group. On January 9, 2019, Dr. Rechtman accompanied the project planner and environmental scientist to a regularly scheduled meeting of the NKCAG. The U purpose was primarily to explain in detail the significant changes in project design and.to take input concerning public access. Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources and Practices The Constitution of the State of Hawaii clearly states the duty of the State and its agencies to preserve, protect, and prevent interference with the traditional and customary rights of native Hawaiians. Article XII, Section 7 requires the State to "protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupuaa tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 0 1778." In spite of the establishment of the foreign concept of private ownership and Western-style government, Kamehameha III (Kauikeaouli) preserved the people's traditional right to subsistence. As a result,in 1850 the Hawaiian Government confirmed the traditional access rights to native Hawaiian ahupuaa tenants to gather specific natural resources for customary uses from undeveloped private property and waterways under the Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 7-1. In 1992, the State of Hawaii Supreme Court reaffirmed HRS 7-1 and ruled that, "native Hawaiian rights...may extend beyond the ahupuaa in which a native Hawaiian resides where such rights have been customarily and traditionally exercised in this manner" (Fele Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Haw.578, 1992). The duty of agencies when granting land use pen-nits to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources, assess impacts to them and devise feasible actions to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights was established by the Hawaii Supreme Court in the case of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs. the Hawaii State Land Use Commission (94 Hawaii 31, 7 P.3d 106, 2000). To assist in consideration of cultural resources and their impacts during the EA/EIS process, the Hawaii State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) developed the Guidelines for L Assessing Cultural Impacts (http://health.hawaii.gov/oegc/). The types of cultural practices and F 105 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SIM beliefs subject to assessment may include subsistence, commercial, residential, agricultural, access-related, recreational, and religious and spiritual customs. A cultural impact assessment must evaluate the probability of impacts on identified cultural resources, including values,rights, beliefs, objects,records,properties, and stories occurring within the project area and its vicinity. Ll As part of the effort to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources, the physical LJ resources of the Kohala Shoreline property, such as,plants and water features, were assessed. In r-7 general, it was observed that no culturally important native vegetation, springs, groves of native _J trees, caves or puu, all of which may have cultural significance, are present on the property. The vegetation of almost the entire property, and all areas potentially affected by construction, is heavily disturbed, alien kiawe forest with buffet grass. Of critical importance, however, is the value of the shoreline and its resources, and the related issue of access. These need to be maintained in as pristine a condition as possible for the sustenance,both physical and cultural,that they provide. In addition to natural resources that are important in cultural practice, the property supports burials and archaeological features that have cultural significance. Potential impacts to ,L these cultural resources and associated practices can be largely avoided or at least greatly reduced by appropriate mitigation. The strategies for implementing this are discussed below. L Mitigation for Cultural Impacts to Burials and Archaeological Sites. To avoid potential impacts to the cultural value of burial sites present on the property, a burial treatment plan will be prepared in compliance with HAR §13-300. To avoid potential adverse impacts to the cultural value of the preservation sites, and to enhance the preservation, interpretive and cultural values of these sites, L an archaeological preservation plan will be prepared. As explained in more detail in the next 1 1 section, 11 archaeological sites will be reassigned a preservation treatment, increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen to 27. Both plans will be implemented prior to the I Li i commencement of any ground-disturbing activities. Throughout this process, native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. These actions must also be implemented prior to any ground-disturbing activities. To mitigate the potential impacts to the cultural value of the other archaeological sites on the property, a data recovery plan will be prepared and implemented in compliance with laws and regulations governing historic sites in the State of Hawaii. 106 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAIM Mitigation for Cultural Impacts to Shoreline Access,Resources and Gathering.The shoreline area of the property is a valued natural/cultural resource because, among other attributes, it provides access to marine resources and practices. Within the local community these lands are known to have been privately held for over 100 years, with access to the shoreline for traditional cultural practices that has never been prohibited but may have been more difficult because of a lack of parking and improved trails. Based on extensive community consultation, the project has been modified over the decades to a plan that now proposes no development from the shoreline to the ala Ioa1jeep road, a distance that varies from 40 to 300 feet (generally over 125 feet), partly in order to protect these practices. Also, in the spirit of mdlama 'dina, current development plans call for a down-zoning from the current zoning of Single-Family Residential 15,000-square foot minimum lot size to Residential and Agricultural 5-acre minimum lot size. The plan would locate building sites away from the shoreline, with low densities and buffers that can preserve a significant portion of the archaeological and cultural landscape. Improved and clearly marked access with the support of the owner will promote continuing and expanded traditional use of the shoreline. In a general sense, access to and use of the shoreline area of the property for recreational, subsistence, transportation, and spiritual purposes can be considered an ancient, as well as ongoing practice, and it is thus a valued cultural resource. The primary concern raised by one consulted party in a previous assessment(William Akau)was that of maintaining lateral pedestrian access for fishing, transportation, and recreation. He has long been an advocate for the perpetuation of Hawaiian rights of access to, and use of, the traditional system of trails. As discussed above,old maps indicate that the land was crossed by a coastal trail or ala loa, parts of which eventually became the coastal jeep road. The extensive trail amenities proposed for the project which include a pedestrian lateral shoreline trail, a maukalmakai pedestrian trail, and a public parking area, will facilitate coastal access and the continued use of r the shoreline for recreational, subsistence, transportation, and spiritual purposes, thus alleviating any potential impacts related to shoreline access and cultural use. Steps like these that help promote access to the shoreline help mitigate the potential detrimental psychosocial effects mentioned above (and discussed in more detail in EA Appendix 3) with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma. 107 EE P, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SM4 r-, Although the shoreline vegetation does not currently include the quality and quantity of botanical resources that would be important for native gathering,leeward areas such as the property formerly supported a number of culturally important littoral (near-shoreline)plants. Accordingly,the area makai of the ala loaljeep road is planned for gradual planting with native shoreline plants that could have cultural value,both simply by their restored presence and also as gathering resources. With the expected decrease in erosion, fire frequency and goat grazing, along with at least a minimal degree of care these plants can become re-established and set an example for restoring �' � P p g traditionally important plants in the State and County public land properties to the north. i In summary, the implementation of the above described measures relative to the identified archaeological sites, public access, cultural resources, and cultural practices and beliefs will help to minimize impacts to such resources, practices, or beliefs by the proposed development of the �1 property. The pedestrian public access easements (which will be dedicated to the County of Hawaii) will allow the perpetuation of access to cultural resources for traditional and customary practices. The native plants planned for reintroduction in the area makai of the ala loaljeep road as part of the owner's landscape concept can be utilized for native gathering. In addition,continued coordination on the part of the owner and future residents with members of the local Native Hawaiian community is encouraged. Allowing these knowledgeable and committed residents to participate in the preservation of resources within the development area and maintain an on-going 1 j dialog with the current and future lot owners would serve both cultural resources and community harmony. r-, r-, The Draft EA was distributed to agencies and groups who,might have knowledge concerning cultural resources in order to confirm the findings. Several parties commented with concerns that archaeological sites must be appropriately treated(see letters from the County Cultural Resources Commission and the National Park Service's Ala Kahakai NHT in EA Appendix lb). The State Historic Preservation Division has concluded that all sites have been appropriately documented, and the next step, if the proposed six-lot development is approved by an SMA Use Permit and a Change of Zone approval,is to complete Preservation and Burial Treatment Plans,which will help ensure protection. As explained in the response letter in EA Appendix lb,based on definitions of cultural resources and practices, the cultural impact assessment specialist for the project does not 108 I� U' Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA concur with Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana— Kako'o's contention that vehicular access by North Kohala residents is a cultural practice that would be restricted by the proposed subdivision. Several parties expressed the idea that a more culturally acceptable option for use of the property would be to have it purchased for open space by the PONC fund. Although recreational use of the property might be marginally increased by public ownership,all cultural uses that public use would allow — fishing, shoreline gathering, implementation of the Ala Kahakai Trail and associated access, and plant gathering — would essentially be accomplished by the development option as well. In addition, development will fund the preparation and implementation of costly archaeological Preservation and Burial Treatment Plans, which otherwise would require public funds. Upon consideration of comments received, the conclusion is that the project, which has been designed to avoid cultural impacts and promote cultural uses, would not adversely affect cultural resources or practices. PUBLIC ACCESS COASTAL RECREATION: Site reconnaissance indicates that the property is lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers. Figure 11 of EA Appendix 3,the Cultural Impact Assessment for the Kohala Shoreline, LLC project,reproduces a portion of Register Map No. 2786 (dated 1917) indicating the presence of a lateral coastal trail projecting into the current project area. This trail is also shown on the 1935 edition of the Tax Map (Figure 16 of EA Appendix 3). This trail, which for many decades has been heavily altered for use as a jeep road,has been called the ala loa and has been assessed as a historic property subject to preservation in place. Mauka-makai vehicular access is currently available on the State parcel adjacent to and north of the property. Mauka-makai and lateral shoreline pedestrian public access is available on the Kohala Kai Subdivision, the private property immediately adjacent to and south of the Kohala Shoreline property. There are a few lateral spurs of vehicular accesses onto the property,but there is no continuous lateral vehicular access across the property. On the property itself, a six-foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline is shown on the Land Court Map for the property. 149 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA L_ Although focused broadly on a long stretch of the coastline of the island of Hawaii, the planned development of the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail (NHT) is also an important potential FJrecreational resource for Kohala. Established in 2000 for the preservation, protection and J' interpretation of traditional Native Hawaiian culture and natural resources, the Ala Kahakai NHT ' is a 175-mile trail corridor acknowledged for its cultural and historical significance. The National J Park Service(NPS)prepared an EIS and a Comprehensive Management Plan(U.S.Department of the Interior 2008),which provided some of the information in this EA. I . The Ala Kahakai NHT traverses hundreds of ancient Hawaiian settlement sites through more than 200 ahupua`a currently owned by private interests and governmental bodies. Cultural resources �1 along the Ala Kahakai include several important heiau, royal centers, kahua (house site �J foundations), loko 'id (fishponds) ko`a (fishing shrines), ki`i pohaku (petroglyphs), holua (stone slides), and wahi pana (sacred places). Natural resources include anchialine ponds,pali (cliffs), Li nearshore reefs,estuarine ecosystems, coastal vegetation,migratory birds,native sea turtle habitat, and several threatened and endangered species of plants and animals. The EIS for the Ala Kahakai NHT considered No Action(A), Single Trail(B),and Ahupua`a Trail System (C) alternatives. Alternative C, the preferred alternative, is based on the traditional n Hawaiian trail system in which multiple trail alignments within the ahupua a (mountain to sea land division) are integral to land use and stewardship. Under the action proposed by NPS, a L� L continuous trail parallel and adjacent to the shoreline would be protected with the consent and cooperation of the affected landowners; however, on public lands and where landowners wish it, 1 the Ala Kahakai NHT could include inland portions of the ala loa or other historic trails that run lateral to the shoreline. The shoreline ala loa and Ala Kahakai alignment would be connected by C-) 1 mauka-makai (mountain to sea) trails equivalent or similar to those that would have traditionally been part of the ahupua`a system. During the 15-year planning period for the trail planning effort, the priority zone from Kawaihae south through Pu`uhonua o Honaunau National Park to Ho`okena r _ (outside and to the south of the property)would be the focus for developing a continuous publicly accessible trail,but trail administration and management would protect and preserve trail sections outside of that zone as feasible. Through an agreement,the State of Hawaii could convey to the j 110 i� L__i� Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM NPS a less-than-fee management interest in trail segments that are State-owned under the Highways Act of 1892 within the Ala Kahakai NIFIT corridor. The NPS would then be responsible for managing these segments and federal law would fully apply. However, in cooperation with the NPS, local communities of the ahupuaa would be encouraged to take responsibility for trail management using the traditional Hawaiian principles of land management and stewardship. The Ala Kahakai Trail Association would be expected to be robust enough to play a major part in trail management,promotion, and funding. Maps contained with the EIS for Alternative C are general; however, they clearly indicate a possible lateral trail passing through the property. Although the scale of the map is so small that the exact alignments of these potential trails cannot be specified with precision, discussion with officials from the NPS as well as community members indicates that the ala loa, which is essentially located on the existing lateral jeep trail, would be the favored location for the Ala Li Kahakai. As such, for the purpose of this document, it is assumed that the alignment of the Ala Kahakai will be along the ala loa. The owner proposes that mauka-makai access to both the existing 6-foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline and the future Ala Kahakai be from a proposed 4-stall public access parking lot near the northern end of the property,as shown in Figure 31. Lateral and mauka-makai public access currently exists on both the northern, State- owned property and on the southern,private property,both of which will connect to the property's lateral public access easement and the future Ala Kahakai. The history of the ala loa trail on the property has been well documented. Hawaii Land Court records confirm that the historical alignment of the ala loa within the property is owned in fee simple by the owner. During the proceedings for Land Court Application No. 1036 in the 1930s, the Territory of Hawaii originally claimed ownership of the five (5)-foot wide "Mahukona- Kawaihae Beach Trail," also known as the ala loa trail, located within the property. As documented in a Stipulation filed on April 27, 193 8,the Territory of Hawai'i agreed to waive and withdraw its claims to the historical alignment of the ala loa trail within the property and other 1 The actual route will be not be a straight line as shown conceptually in Figure 3 but will involve a practical path, down the s as requested Wc�_Uil� slope that follows to the extent the existing historic trail consulteesNo encroachment into burial site buffer zones will occur, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM adjacent lands,in consideration of the agreement by the owner's predecessor-in-interest to convey certain roadway parcels in Waika,North Kohala,Hawaii to the Territory of Hawaii. [J Subsequently, the Land Court entered a Decision on May 9, 1938, confirming that title to the historical aligm-nent of the ala loa trail segment running through the property was owned in fee simple by the owners of the surrounding lands. Therefore, the historical alignment of the ala loa trail within theproperty is not a State-owned trail. On November 20, 2014, the State DLNR Na Ala Hele Trail & Access System Abstractor confirmed that the 1930s Land Court proceedings covering the property and adjacent lands resulted in a finding that "the Territory of Hawaii subsequently waived and withdrew its claim to all trails with the subject land." Impacts and Mitigation Measures As shown in the Site Plan in Figure 3, the owner proposes to provide mauka-makai and lateral FUill pedestrian public access through the property. Use of the shoreline area of the property for fishing, gathering and hiking would not be affected by the proposed development, as these activities can occur within the area of the existing coastal public access easement,and,when accepted as a public access easement by the County Council, along the proposed Ala Kahakai/ ala loa public access easement. The outdoor activities and public access experience will be accommodated by the wide setback from the shoreline—extending all the way from the shoreline through the ala loa— that would prohibit development within the setback area. The owner will work with representatives from the federal Ala Kahakai NHT, the State's Na Ala Hele Trail & Access program, and the North Kohala Community Access Group to have the Ala Kahakai Trail constructed,presumably on the existing ala loaIjeep road, with appropriate adjustments to provide buffers for burial sites that the jeep road currently intrudes upon. ala loa alignment provides ample area for construction, maintenance and use of the Ala Kahakai. This trail alignment, expected to be 10 feet in width in conformance with both the design standards of the Ala Kahakai and Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code,will insure continued public access to and utilization of shoreline resources. Pedestrian access to this shoreline area at the property would be available from properties to the north or south using the lateral pedestrian shoreline trail, or by walking to the shoreline from the public parking area that would be built on the northern end of the property. The proposed four- 112 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zane and SAM stall parking area (the same number of stalls required under SMA 379 for the 50-lot residential project)would be accessed from Akoni Pule Highway and the northern road access(see Figure 3). The parking area,which would be open from a half-hour before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset, would access a new 800-foot long, 10-foot wide mauka-makai pedestrian trail. No direct vehicular access to the shoreline would be allowed, either by residents or the general public. The establishment and maintenance of trail amenities as part of the Ala Kahakai on the property will facilitate coastal access and the continued use of the shoreline for recreational purposes, providing a net benefit to hiking use on the Ala Kahakai NHT and fishing and gathering on the shoreline. The current 6-foot wide trail easement on the shoreline is inadequate for shoreline access, as much of it is steep and eroded. The applicant will seek to dedicate an easement on each lot makai of the ala loaIjeep road for the entire length of the property for public access, creating, in essence, a 50 to 250-foot wide "trail." It is expected that most hikers will utilize the ala loa /jeep road to traverse the property (and/or the Ala Kahakai, when constructed by government agencies),while fishermen may prefer to utilize the path directly along the shoreline. Discussion of construction of the .Ala Kahakai NHT, including inventory and assessment of resources and possible side trails to coastal recreation locations or lookouts, is beyond the scope of this application. These issues will be addressed during planning of the trail by the NPS and the State's Na Ala Hele program. However, one aspect that does require analysis is the side-effect of increased public access on wildfire potential. If DLNR plans to intensify use of its property to the north in association with the Ala Kahakai NHT (or any other recreational amenity), it is recommended that the agency install signs warning of the possibility of fire, and also that it considers firebreaks. This recommendation is extended to any plans to encourage public use of trails along the North Kohala coastline; wildfire is a significant issue faced by the Ala Kahakai NHT. According to the EIS for the project, the NPS will prepare a fire management plan in coordination with appropriate State and County agencies. The plan will account for sensitive cultural resources and incorporate guidelines that assist fire personnel in the choice of procedures, tools, and equipment used in fire suppression and post-fire rehabilitation to help protect resources and land even during fire emergencies. 113 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM SMA Permit 379 required the following: • Condition 7: A mauka-makai road access of sufficient width to accommodate vehicle access 24 hours a day for drop off and pick up shall be provided along with the minimum 14-foot wide lateral public access walkway along the shoreline. The type of improvements and specific location of the walkway shall be determined at the time of subdivision approval review. Further, a minimum of four on-site public parking stalls to serve the, walkway shall be provided and clearly identified. A shoreline setback variance shall be secured for any improvements to the public access which will be within* the 40-foot IJ shoreline setback area. Construction of the public walkway and parking stalls shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permit for any structures. • Condition 8(also Condition 0 of change of zone Ordinance No.97-02):The applicant shall develop and submit a comprehensive public access plan for the subject property for review v and approval to the Planning Director, in consultation with the Department of Land and Natural Resources (Na Ala Hele Trails Program), in conjunction with Final Subdivision U Approval. The public access plan shall provide for mauka-makai and lateral shoreline pedestrian accessways, public parking stalls for users of the shoreline area, signage and Li restrictions on use (if any). Such public access improvements shall be completed prior to Final Subdivision Approval for any portion of the subject property. L Although the project is far less and dense and impactful than the project for which these conditions were imposed, somewhat similar conditions requiring a public access plan and a parking lot at the northern entrance to the development are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit and the rezoning ordinance that would grant the change of zone to LRA-5a. The owner will request that the parking lot hours be from a half-hour before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset. r F Throughout the history of the previous projects, some members of the public have requested vehicular access to the shoreline or parking lots closer to the shoreline;combining the public access with the Kohala Kai access to the south to get a wider access that could potentially"switchback7 and achieve a lower grade;and 24-hour access. While support for the Ala Kahakai has been almost universal, some have been concerned that portions of the ala loa were too sensitive to be used. 114 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Public access plans on any property planned for development must balance the needs of the public for reasonable access to and along the shoreline with interests of the landowner. The proposed access plan at Kohala Shoreline — with a parking lot and trail to allow users to park within the property and walk about 250 yards to the shoreline—would appear to be reasonable and typical of coastal developments in the region, which do not allow vehicles to park on the shoreline and instead require walking an access route that is open during daylight and dusk hours. Most of the major public accesses in North and South Kohala require walks of 200 to 400 yards. This includes Hapuna Beach State Park(280-455 yards),the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel (400-520 yards), Kohala Waterfront (270-290 yards), Kohala Kai (480 yards), and Lapakahi State Park (275 yards). The proposed plan would improve public access,which is a beneficial impact. SOCIO-ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS Existing Environment The proposed action would most directly affect the portions of rural North Kohala along Akoni Pule Highway and to a lesser extent the town of Kawaihae. Table 5 provides information on the socioeconomic characteristics of North Kohala, along with those of Hawaii County as a whole for comparison, from the 2010 U.S. Census of Population. Impacts The development of a 6-lot subdivision with lots that would all eventually contain residences would lead to only a minor increase in population. Based on the North Kohala average household size and vacancy rates,an increase of about 16 residents would occur,although some of the homes are expected to be occupied part-time by off-island residents. This would lead to minor shifts in demographic characteristics, unemployment rates, and demands on public services. Importantly, the population increase is consistent with the expectations of single-family zoning and low-density urban LUPAG designation. Mitigation Measures 115 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following: Condition D. Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all proposed residential lots within the subject property shall prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit on each lot. A copy of the proposed covenants to be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances shall be submitted with the plans for subdivision to the Planning Director for review and approval. A copy of the approved covenants shall shall be recited in an instrument executed by the applicant and the County and recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances in conjunction with the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. 0 Condition L. To ensure that the goals and policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan are implemented,the applicant shall secure the concurrence of the Office of E, Housing and Community Development that the applicant's affordable housing requirements, if any have been mutually agreed to prior to Final Subdivision Approval. II Although the proposed six-lot subdivision is far smaller and less impactful than the project for which these conditions were approved, somewhat similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the ordinance that would grant the change of zone to RA-5a. In particular, because the Ell Subdivision involves five or more lots, the applicant would be required as part of the subdivision process to comply with the County's Affordable Housing Ordinance and thus contribute to affordable housing in the region. Li F 116 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Table 5.Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics CHARACTERISTIC Hawaii Island North Kohala Total Population 187,044 6,579 Percent White 33.0% 19.5% Percent Asian 17.1% 17.1% Percent Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 12.5% 12.5% Percent Two or More Races 28.9% 48.7% Median Age(Years) 40.7 38.2 Percent Under 18 Years 22.5% 18.0% Percent 65 Years and Over 15.4% 16.2% Percent Households with Children 25.5% 29.0% Average Household Size 2.83 3.34 Percent Housing Vacant 22.0% 20.8% Percent Over 16 Years in Labor Force 61.2% 62.1% Median Household Income $51,520 $58,673 Percent Below Poverty Level 18.3% 18.1% Percent 25 years and older with High School Degree 91.0% 93.3% Percent with Disability 13.5% 12.6% Percent Foreign Born 12.7% 8.06% Source:U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder:http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/J*sf/pages/index.xhttnl SURROUNDING LANDS LAND USE AND ZONING: (Please see page 20 for Zoning Map.) The subject property is surrounded by existing and proposed rural developments. To the east is the Kohala Ranch subdivision with A-5 a and A-3 a zoning near Akoni Pule Highway and more urban zoning (RS-20, RM-4 and CV-10) at higher elevations. These lands are used for rural residential and some small scale agricultural purposes. Immediately to the south is the Kohala Kai subdivision with A-5 zoning, currently vacant, and to the north is vacant State owned property also zoned A-5a. 117 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM V. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES: The applicant expects a fair-share assessment will be applied to this change of zone request, which has been the policy of the County Council for many years. This fee is designed to address infrastructure impacts caused by the additional units in the subj ect area. In addition during the review of this application the various agencies may suggest additional and specific infrastructure impacts to address current infrastructure inadequacies. ACCESS,ROADWAYS AND TRAFFIC Pursuant to Section 25-2-46(Concurrency Requirements),Hawaii County Zoning Code, a traffic impact analysis report (TLAR) is required with the application for any zoning amendment which can generate 50 or more peak hour trips. The proposed six-lot subdivision project thus was analyzed to determine the number of peak hour trips. The trip generation methodology used is based upon applications developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and published in "Trip Generation", 8th Edition, 2011. 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 Classification number for identification purposes. In this case, Classification 210, Single-family Detached, was used. For any given classification,repeated field studies by the ITE measuring actual trips generated by different land uses has calculated a generator factor for peak hour trips. This factor is multiplied by the number of units in a land use(in this case,single-family residences). This is further divided into trips that are entering or exiting the development, a split that differs by time of day. As shown in Table 7, a six-lot subdivision generates a total of less than 12 peak hour trips;furthermore,in this case,they are split(>5 and>7)between two separate access U11" points. It should be further noted that to obtain conservative estimates of potential traffic, no L adjustments were made to reflect the impact of less than full-time residents, which could be the case in the study area. In any case, as the project would generate far less than 50 peak hour trips, Lno TUR is necessary. 118 L! Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Table 7. Project Peak Hour Trip Generation Time Number of Lots Generator Trips Entering Trips Exiting Total Using Access Factor Trips % # % T # # Akoni Pule Highway&South Access point AM 2 0.77 26% <1 74% <2 <3 PM 2 1.02 64% —1 26% <1 <2 Akoni Pule Highway&Kohala Ranch Road AM 4 0.77 26% <1 74% <2 <3 PM 4 1.02 64% <3 26% 1 <4 The project clearly has no potential to generate substantial traffic at peak hour or any other time. Nevertheless, impacts to roadways and access are considered. EXISTING AND PROPOSED FACILITIES The project's two short internal roadways are confined to the portion of the property immediately adjacent to the highway (see Figure 3). They will be designed and constructed as two private residential streets with minimum 50-foot rights-of-way, which could be slightly widened to account for slope, occupied by two 10-foot wide paved lanes with grassed or aggregate shoulders on which parking will not be allowed, to preclude wildfire ignition. The north roadway will be about 350 feet long and will provide access to four driveways and the public parking lot. The south access point will be an approximately 100-foot long stab that will provide access to two driveways. Per LID Guidelines, they will include dry swales to assist with storinwater flow reduction (Hawai'i CZM Program 2006). Akoni Pule Highway(State Highway 270) is the major north-south highway in the vicinity of the property, conducting traffic between Hawi and Kawaihae and beyond. Other access to North Kohala is available on the Kohala Mountain Road, located approximately five miles to the east(a private road for Kohala Ranch residents only connects the Kohala Mountain Road and Akoni Pule Highway). The Akoni Pule Highway,which is under the jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii,has one lane in each direction and a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour in this area. The highway has a south-bound turn lane and acceleration and deceleration lanes at the intersection with Kohala Ranch Road. Several intersections are present within a mile of Kohala Ranch Road. There are no improved intersections within a mile to the north of the property, although there are 119 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA unimproved and impermitted accesses to various 4WD roads on the State property makai. The nearest existing access to the south is the first Kohala Kai Subdivision entrance, 2,140 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road,which is a three-legged intersection extending north, south and west;then Ala Kahua Road, which extends north, south and east, at 2,800 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road; then the second and third Kohala Kai Subdivision roads,3,500 feet and 4,400 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road, which also features three-legged intersections extending north, south and west; and finally the Hokulele Road/Lela Nai'a at Kohala Waterfront Subdivision,a four-legged intersection located 5,000 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road. At a minimum of 500 feet apart, these intersections are widely spaced. No new intersections are planned or would likely be permitted, given State Highways policies. Impacts and Mitigation Measures As stated above and shown in Figure 3, access and egress for the six-lot subdivision,will be from two new access point s along the makai side of Akoni Pule Highway. Due to the low background traffic in this area,both intersections are proposed to be unsignalized. Given the low total number of peak hour trips generated by the project, no adverse effects to local or regional traffic are expected. II The north access point will be the west leg of the existing intersection of the highway with Kohala Ranch Road;it will provide access and egress to four lots. Existing conditions at the Kohala Ranch Road intersection are as follows: a southbound through lane, a northbound through lane, northbound right lane, a westbound lane and a westbound right/out lane. There is a refuge pocket for the westbound left turn lane on Akoni Pule Highway. There is adequate area to make a lane for a northbound left refuge pocket and for a southbound right deceleration lane. The south access point will also be located along the west side of the highway, approximately 1,300 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road(and the north access point); it will provide access to two lots. The proposed intersection improvements to Akoni Pule Highway at the south access point would be determined in consultation with the Hawaii State Department of Transportation, Highways Division(DOT). Improvements to both intersections would require design review by and approval from the DOT, which will also deal with the issue of utility easements in the highway right-of-way. 120 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following related to roads and traffic: • Rezoning Ordinance Condition F.Access to the subject property from Akoni Pule Highway and any improvements within the Akoni Pule Highway shall be constructed prior to Final Subdivision Approval meeting with the requirements and approval of the State Department of Transportation. • Rezoning Ordinance Condition G. Roadway connections to the adjoining parcel of the subject property's southeastern boundary shall be provided meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works and shall be delineated on the final subdivision plat map for the subject property. • Rezoning Ordinance Condition H. All interior roadways within the subject property shall be constructed meeting with the requirements of Chapter 23 of the Subdivision Code and with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Although the current project is far smaller and less impactful to traffic than the project for which these conditions were imposed, similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of any new Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a, however,the project may require approval of a variance or planned unit development permit to address road standards,lot sizes and other design variances. The only mitigation required would be restriping of Akoni Pule Highway at the north access point to convert the existing refuge pocket into a northbound left turn lane. EXISTING UTILITIES Electrical power would be supplied to the project area by Hawaii Electric Light,a privately-owned utility company regulated by the State Public Utilities Commission,via its island-wide distribution network. In the project area the network utilizes overhead lines in a utility easement that runs parallel to and approximately 2,000 feet east(mauka)of Akoni Pule Highway. Telephone service is available from Hawaiian Telcom,also located in the utility easement. Underground connections to those utilities will be established for the project, similar to those utilized in the Kohala Ranch and Kohala Estates subdivisions located to the east and southeast. 121 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SVM Water will be provided to the project under an agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company Eli) through a 12-inch water line along Akoni Pule Highway fronting the site. Storage in the Kohala Ranch Water system is provided by an existing 500,000-gallon storage reservoir located approximately 1,400 feet east of the property. This tank is sufficient to meet domestic and fire protection requirements for the project. Six-inch water lines will be installed at two locations along Akoni Pule Highway to provide water for the project's homes and fire hydrants. The capacity of the private system is adequate to accommodate the additional demand to serve the project's six lots, which is expected to be a maximum of 1,000 gallons per day. CC&Rs will require that the homes feature low-water fixtures and use roof-runoff for irrigation,as well as low- water-use landscaping, which is also in keeping with the natural vegetation of this part of Kohala. U No municipal wastewater treatment service is available in Kohala. Homes will utilize individual wastewater treatment systems meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health at Chapter 11-62, "Wastewater Systems." All six residences would use systems such as the Cyclic tJ Biological Treatment (CBT) system evaluated in Babcock et al (2006), per LID Guidelines on Ewastewater treatment(Hawai'i CZM Program 2006: 4-9). The removal rates of the CBT system would be 85 percent for TN and 75 percent for TP. Effluent from the CBT system would be Ell disposed of in leach fields. Upon passage through the leach fields, the effluent would travel downward through unsaturated lava flows and then travel with the basal groundwater to discharge along the property's shoreline. Removal of TN and TP during passage through the leach field and unsaturated lavas are conservatively assumed to be 70 and 90 percent, respectively. The system will be managed through the homeowners' association by one of the professional wastewater companies that operate in the West Hawaii area. The proposed addition of dwellings on the 6 lots is a relatively minor action in the context of existing utility systems, and it would not have any adverse impact on existing public or private utilities. The design of the homes will incorporate features to minimize water use. EXISTING PUBLIC SERVICES AND FACILITIES Fire, police and emergency medical services are available at a full-time fire station and a police station in Kapa'au located approximately 16 miles to the north. There is also a volunteer fire 122 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM station located at Kohala Ranch approximately two miles to the east. County medivac helicopter service is available seven miles south of the property on Queen Ka'ahumanu Highway at the South Kohala Fire Station, which also contains a police sub-station. Acute medical care service is available at Kohala Hospital in Kapa'au, and also at North Hawaii Community Hospital in Waimea, approximately 14 miles away. Solid waste from the development will be hauled by residents and/or collected and hauled by commercial disposal operators to the County's West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill in Pu'uanahulu, which has several decades of capacity. Public schools in the area include Kohala Elementary School and Kohala Intermediate & High School, both of which are in Kapa'au. There are also elementary and middle schools located in both Waimea and Waikoloa. Two private K to 12 school, Hawaii Preparatory Academy and Parker School, are located in Waimea. Several State and County beach parks are located within 18 miles of the property, including Spencer County Beach Park, Hapuna, Beach State Park, Lapakabi State Park, Mahukona County Park, Kapa'a County Beach Park, Kamehameha County Park and Keokea County Beach Park. Additional recreational and open space land was acquired by the County makai of Akoni Pule Highway at Ka'iholena and Pdo'o; there are currently no facilities there. Pu'ukohola Heiau, a federal historical site, is located near Kawaihae. Public boat ramps are located at Mahukona,Kawaihae Harbor and Puako. Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Public Facilities and Services The project may have an effect on public services and facilities through minor additional demand for fire, police, and emergency services, solid waste services, schools and recreational facilities. Taxes and a system of required fair share contributions will mitigate these impacts. Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following: • Rezoning Ordinance Condition P. The applicant shall make its fair share contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the subject property with respect to parks and recreation, fire,police, solid waste disposal facilities, and roads. 123 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM • Rezoning Ordinance Condition E. In conjunction with Final Subdivision approval, the applicant shall construct the necessary distribution pipeline, service laterals, and fire hydrants,meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. No building j permit for any of the residential structures shall be issued until units of water are available { � and committed to the subject property,as represented in the applicant's agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company(formerly Kohala Joint Venture). Condition K. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall Rezoning Ordinance Co pp gns prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed development within the subject property meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. A copy of the approved Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director. Although the current project is far smaller and less impactful to public services and utilities than the project for which these conditions were imposed,similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a. It should be noted that high value rural residential/resort-residential homes in the County of Hawaii tend to provide a significant net benefit in terms of public services and facilities. A 2003 economic study of resort-residential housing (Decision Analysts Hawaii, Inc. 2003) in West Hawaii determined that on balance it provides substantial economic benefits to the Big Island. Construction and occupant expenditures are important for employment and economic growth, and r� �y the support services required by those occupying the homes and condominiums cost far less to the County and State than the large amount of property taxes they pay. Revenues are high and steady because of the large numbers of very high value units, the low percentage of homeowners who qualify for homeowner exemptions, and the high property tax rate for properties that are not occupied by homeowners. Government costs are low because developers fund most or all of the infrastructure and amenity construction costs, and often much of the operating costs. Also, low occupancy rates mean lower demand for County services, and as most residents are well-off,they require little if any government assistance. According to the report: i 124 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SiVM P "Thus, property—tax revenues from resort-residential projects exceed support F1 expenditures by $20.8 million per year for existing projects ($22.2 million— $1.4 million) and $25 million per year for planned projects ($26.7 million — $1.7 million). In effect, resort-residential projects provide substantial tax revenues to subsidize support services to other Big Island residents and visitors"(Ibid: 6). In summary,considering fair share contributions and real property and other tax contributions,the six-lot Kohala Shoreline,LLC development would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. =In addition, the owner would be required as part of the subdivision process to comply with the County's Affordable Housing Ordinance and to contribute to affordable housing in the region. CUMULATICE IMPACTS: Somewhat distinct from the direct effects that construction and occupation of a housing project can have on the environment are secondary impacts. These can include impacts from residents traveling to different parts of the island for work or recreation and inducing impacts in environmentally sensitive areas. Another potential secondary impact is economic; although generally positive, increased economic activity resulting from the expenditures of new residents can draw in workers who add to the existing demand for affordable housing. In the case of the subject project, its modest scale in relation to the existing population of the island indicates that any such adverse secondary impacts would be negligible. U Cumulative impacts result when implementation of several projects that individually have limited impacts combine to produce more severe impacts or conflicts in mitigation measures. It is therefore appropriate to frame the setting in the context of ongoing and future developments. The North Kohala District is primarily residential in nature, with some ongoing agricultural activities including ranching. Some commercial activities occur in its two primary towns, Hawi and Kapa'au. This area supported some of the earliest wind farms in Hawaii and is being explored for biomass and green farming. Between these towns and the property in the very south of North Kohala lies an area of undeveloped shoreline,with expansive vistas both mauka and makai. Over the decades, several subdivisions have been proposed that would alter the character of some areas 125 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change ofZone and SMA of shoreline,prompting calls by citizens to acquire open space, which have been answered by the County with several property acquisitions. Although on the fringe of this undeveloped area, the Kohala Shoreline property itself is adjacent to several upscale agricultural and residential subdivisions, including the more than 3,500-acre Kohala Ranch, which is continuing to be developed with homes. The property is near the border of South Kohala and approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor, one of only two deep-draft harbors on Hawaii Island and the only one located on its western or leeward side. A small-boat harbor, which the State has expanded, is also located there. Also located in Kawaihae is the State Department of Hawaiian UHome Lands' 10,152-acre Kawaihae Tract which, while currently mostly used for grazing, will eventually be developed with commercial, residential, agricultural and community use U components. The town of Kawaihae itself has a small residential population and several small commercial centers. Aside from the residential and*industrial uses at the Department of Hawaiian U Home Lands projects to the south of the property,no major projects are known to be proposed for development in the area. D The proposed six-lot subdivision project will have minor impacts for almost all categories of resources. It should be noted that the proposed change of zone limits future potential density from the 50 lots approved under SMA 379 down to six lots. Cumulative effects are potentially of concern for the following resources: * Traffic: Considered cumulatively,there is a negligible effect on Average Daily Traffic on Akoni Pule Highway and all other major roads, but a slightly more substantial effect with the interaction of left turns at the main entrance of Kohala Ranch. This is mitigable by the L11 proposed project intersection improvements, which includes a northbound to westbound left-tum pocket and a southbound deceleration lane. * Visual Resources: The project will contribute to the slow transformation of the views of U undeveloped coastal areas that is occurring in North Kohala. The effect is not severe in this part of North Kohala because of the extensive developed area that lies directly mauka, as well as the presence of other similarly developed coastal properties to the south. This is further mitigated by the proposed project design that locates house pads away from both the highway and the shoreline, retains most of the existing kiawe tree landscape, and L126 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM restricts homes to 25 feet in height in a development concept significantly less dense than allowed by existing zoning. Furthermore, the prevalence of essentially undevelopable State properties adjacent to the north, combined with the continuing acquisition by the County of private properties makai of the highway, will cumulatively build the inventory of perpetually undeveloped shoreline in North Kohala. This will maintain the health of this scenic resource. • Water Quality: The project may minimally add to input of nutrients and other pollutants (while likely slightly reducing sedimentation)but changes of land use associated with the project should not contribute along with other actions to a decrease in water quality. A cumulative beneficial impact is the provision of a corridor, along with a landowner encouraged to be cooperative under expected SMA and Change of Zone conditions, for the establishment of the Ala Kahakai Trail across the property. This trail system is meant to traverse the entire west coast of the island. A trail segment on the property would provide a key link. The benefit of this section of the trail would accumulate with similar benefits for nearby properties,helping create a coherent trail that is greater than the sum of its parts. 127 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SAM VI. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ANALYSIS Relationship between local short term uses of the environment and maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity; Mitigative measures proposed to avoid, minimize, rectify or reduce impact;Alternatives to the proposed development; and Irreversible and irretrievable commitments of natural resources that would be involved if proposed action implemented: n ALTERNATIVES Li PROPOSED PROJECT r_? As detailed above, the proposed project is development of a 6-lot subdivision and related improvements, with vehicular access and utility connections within the State of Hawai'i's Akoni n Pule Highway right-of-way(see Figure 3 for conceptual lot layout). It would involve a change of zone from Single-Family Residential minimum lot size 15,000 square feet(RS-15)to Residential- Agricultural minimum lot size 5 acres (the original zoning density of the property before it was n changed to RS-15)and a Special Management Area Use Permit. It is expected that each lot would eventually be developed with a residence and accessory uses. NO ACTION Under the No Action Alternative,development of the property as discussed above would not occur. This would avoid any adverse environmental impacts related to the development. It would also preclude economic benefits including jobs, income, and tax revenues associated with the development; environmental benefits such as sediment reduction and native species revegetation; and social benefits such as enhancement of public access on an improved trail parallel to the shoreline. The No Action Alternative forms the baseline against which environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are measured. ALTERNATIVES EVALUATED AND DISMISSED FROM FURTHER CONSIDERATION The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential,with minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet(RS-15), which could allow up to 110 dwelling units. The Planning Commission previously L issued SMA Use Pen-nit No. 379 (SMA 379) allowing a 50-lot single-family residential subdivision(see Table 1). SMA 379 is in technical default for failure to timely comply with certain 128 LJ Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change ofZone and SMA conditions of approval. Upon reviewing the property and development options, the owner determined that a less dense development alternative of 6 lots would decrease many of the impacts associated with the density permitted under RS-15 zoning and would also be more in keeping with his Mission Statement and the surrounding zoning and land uses. Therefore, a higher density alternative using existing zoning is not being considered at the present time and is not being advanced in this Environmental Assessment. If the proposed rezoning is not approved, the owner may in the future consider a higher-density development consistent with the current RS-15 zoning, at which time the owner would comply with all applicable requirements of HRS Chapter 343. The owner does not envision any other development scenarios that could reasonably satisfy its objectives and vision for the property, and therefore none are advanced or analyzed. As stated previously, a project previously proposed by Kohala Shoreline LLC was 50 percent denser, with nine lots, and included several building sites near the shoreline makai of the ala loa. This design concept would be much less satisfactory in meeting the environmental and community goals of the project and is no longer under consideration as an alternative. Chapter 11-200-12, Hawaii Administrative Rules, outlines those factors agencies must consider when determining whether an Action has significant effects: 1. The proposed project will not involve an irrevocable commitment or loss or destruction of any natural or cultural resources. No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost. Archaeological sites are being protected through preservation plans, and there will be a wide setback zone from the shoreline to protect and promote public enjoyment of shoreline resources. The property and surrounding areas support residential and open space uses that will not be affected by the proposed action. 129 i, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA J 2. The proposed project will not curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment. FJ, The principal beneficial use of the area is for shoreline recreation, which will not be curtailed in i any way— and in fact will be substantially enhanced through provision of a corridor for the Ala Kahakai trail and a wide easement area for public shoreline enjoyment. 3. The proposed project will not conflict with the State's long-term environmental policies. The States long-term environmental policies are set forth in Chapter 344, HRS. The broad goals of this policy are to conserve natural resources and enhance the quality of life.The proposed action provides housing in an area identified in the General Plan for such uses, fulfilling needed County and State goals while avoiding significant impacts to the environment. It is thus consistent with all elements of the State's long-term environmental policies. 4. The proposed project will not substantially affect the economic or social welfare of the community or State. J The project will not adversely affect the social welfare of the community and will contribute to the economy and to shoreline access. S. The proposed project does not substantially affect public health in any detrimental way. No effects to public health are anticipated. Water quality will be protected, and likely enhanced, through adherence to Best Management Practices that will be specified as part of NPDES and Grading permits. 6. The proposed project will not involve substantial secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Only modest secondary effects are expected to result from the rural residential project. Because of the nature of the project,real property and other tax contributions would more than compensate 130 L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. 7. The proposed project will not involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality. The proposed action is taking place in a general area already impacted in the past or currently by onsite ranching, fire and goat grazing, and by nearby construction and rural residential activities. The project would be regulated by permits to avoid environmental degradation and thus would not contribute to environmental degradation. 8. The proposed project is not one which is individually limited but cumulatively may have considerable effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. Traffic impacts from the six lots will have a negligible impact on cumulative traffic operations. The project will contribute to the transformation of views of undeveloped coastal areas occurring in North Kohala, but the effect is not severe because of the remaining extensive stretch of undeveloped coastal areas to the north,as well as the presence directly mauka and south of already developed areas. The project may minimally add to input of nutrients and other pollutants (while likely slightly reducing sedimentation)but changes of land use associated with the project should not change water quality of the offshore area to any discernible extent. 9. The proposed project will not substantially affect any rare, threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna or habitat. The property supports overwhelmingly alien vegetation. With standard mitigation on timing of vegetation removal to protect Hawaiian hoary bats, impacts to rare, threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna will not occur. 10. The proposed project will not detrimentally affect air or water quality or ambient noise levels. 131 Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA r-t i Due to the character of the proposed action, no non-negligible adverse effects on these resources would occur. I _! 11. The project does not affect nor would it likely to be damaged as a result of being located in environmentally sensitive areas such as a flood plain, tsunami zone, erosion prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary,fresh water, or coastal area. Although the proposed action is located in an area with seismic and shoreline hazard, the entire _J Island of Hawaii shares this risk,and the proposed action is not imprudent to construct. All home development will be set well back from the shoreline at elevations of 40 feet or higher to account for potential sea level rise. Culverts within the subdivision are being planned as oversized to r accommodate the 100-year, rather than the required 50-year storm, in order to account for future potential increases in runoff. Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that climate change may lead to drier n rather than wetter conditions,increasing wildfire risk. If this occurs,the substantial precautions to U prevent and adapt to wildfire risk will mitigate additional potential risk. F U 12. The project will not substantially affect scenic vistas and viewplanes identified in county or n state plans or studies. U U' The project has been designed through restrictions in density, grading,tree removal, home height and home position to minimize impacts on protected scenic viewplanes, including views from Akoni Pule Highway of the coast. The project will contribute to the transformation of views of undeveloped coastal areas occurring in North Kohala, but the effect is not severe because of the remaining extensive stretch of undeveloped coastal areas to the north, as well as the presence directly mauka and south of already developed areas. 13. The project will not require substantial energy consumption. L 132 t_J L Kohala Shoreline, LLC Change of Zone and SMA Although the project's infrastructure and dwelling unit construction will require energy, the development's electrical requirements are within HELCO's capacity and no major adverse effects to energy consumption would be expected. There is no feasible way to provide housing without energy consumption. The project design will include photovoltaic solar, energy efficient lighting* fixtures, low water use fixtures, and low water use landscaping, all of which reduce energy use. DETERMINATION Based on the findings above, and upon consideration of comments to the Draft EA,the County of Hawaii,Planning Department,has determined that the proposed action will not significantly alter the environment, as impacts will be minimal, and has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). 133 USE PERMIT SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA ITS PERMIT SIX LOT SUBDIVISION OWNER: KOHALA SHORELINNE, LLC APPLICANT: MANAGERIKOHALA SHORELINE, LLC NATHAN MYRHVOLD, ROSEMARIE HAVRANEK MEMBERS TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 I. SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION J ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Kohala Shoreline,LLC proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision makai of the Akoni Pule Highway i (State Route 270) on a 37.88-acre parcel located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. The lots would vary in size from about 5 to 8 acres,with all building sites located mauka of the ala loa (old coastal trail)/jeep road. The properly site is currently zoned Single-Family Residential (RS-15), which would be modified to Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a) to permit larger lots and less dense development when residences are built. Similar developments are located nearby at Kohala Ranch, Kohala Kai Subdivision and at Kohala by the Sea Subdivision. Road access would be from two permitted access locations along the highway, although one of L these locations is proposed to be moved to avoid a gulch crossing. The lots would be provided with internal access and underground electricity, telephone and water service from existing lines ' along the highway. The future homes would utilize individual wastewaters stems designed pursuant to State Health Department requirements and would exceed those requirements by installing aerobic treatment systems, which produce a higher qualityefluent that can be utilized for irrigation. The project includes public parking and a mauka-makai shoreline access,as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. It is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa,which meanders through the makai third of the property. To translate the owner's mission statement of sustainable development to practical measures,the project has adopted several design and mitigation measures C` that far exceed requirements related to environmental permits. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) Guidelines. A botanical survey conducted on the property found no threatened or endangered plant species. Vegetation consists of introduced species, except for several common plants indigenous to Hawaii. Implementation of archaeological preservation,data recovery plans and burial treatment plans, in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, will mitigate impacts to historic sites. Cultural impacts on traditional and customary gathering rights along the shoreline will be avoided by the large shoreline buffer area below the ala loa and public access provisions that will preserve the landscape and cultural uses of the shoreline area. In the unlikely event that additional archaeological resources or human remains are encountered during future development activities,work in the immediate area of the discovery will be halted. The home sites would be located on land with a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees, a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway, a minimum of 40 feet in elevation, and a minimum of 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road. Covenants will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and will require a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. Due to these design features, low density/large lots and the sloping nature of the site,the project would have only minor visual impacts for drivers on Akoni Pule Highway looking toward the sea. The project is not expected to have a negative impact on coastal water resources, as it would be low-density, with homes utilizing advanced wastewater systems and separated from the ocean by the wide shoreline setback,with substantial measures to control sedimentation to be low current levels. The HawaiGi County Planning Department, based on its review of the document and comments to the Draft EA and responses to them,has determined that the proposed action,will not significantly alter the environment as impacts will be minimal and that this agency has issued a Finding of No P 7 g Y g Significant Impact(FONSI). II. SUBJECT REQUEST Kohala Shoreline, LLC ("Kohala Shoreline" or "the owner") proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision (the project) within its 37.88-acre property at TMK (3) 5-9-001:008 at Kahudli'ili'i, North Kohala, County and State of Hawaii (the "property" or "subject property") located along Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270), approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor (Figures 1-4). The property is within the County's Special Management Area (SMA), and an SMA Use Permit application will be processed with the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission(Planning Commission). A change of zone application from the current Single-Family Residential (RS-15) zoning district to the Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a) zoning district will be concurrently processed through the Planning Commission and the County Council. The Mission Statement for the owner of the property expresses the intent to develop and utilize the property with a minimum of impact: Our mission is to set a new standard of stewardship for new, small-scale, coastal housing clusters for twenty first century Hawai`i. Hawaii is blessed with pristine beauty and rich biodiversity. Traditionally, its people lived in harmonywith the land and the sea protecting the natural wonderments that make , p g Hawaii such an extraordinary place. To this end, we will work to protect and preserve the sensitive natural landscapes and seascapes along the Hawaiian coastline. Furthermore, we will serve as good neighbors to the local communities, respecting their values and cultural traditions. We believe that the built environment must be mindful of its intrusion into, and its framing within, the natural environment. We will build an environmentally healthy house that minimizes its impacts to the earth and possesses an aesthetic beauty in balance with its natural surroundings. To lessen the negative climate impacts caused by conventional structures we will use bestractices in design for energy efficiency and p 8n functionality, and for low carbon production and natural resource consumption. Natural will be sustainably harvested and all manufactured materials such as wood and stone y .f materials used will be environmentally sensitive. We will use construction methods that avoid or mitigate disruptions to the local ecology and wildlife, as well as to the archeological history of those who lived on this land before us. This mission is a commitment made by ourselves, and by our partners in design and construction. We will ask our future neighbors on the property to join us in following this mission as well. To translate this mission statement to practical measures,the project will adopt several design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to environmental permits. CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) Guidelines (Hawai'i �y CZM Program 2006). While not all design guidelines are appropriate to any given site, one principle that connects all LID practices is sustainability: LID is defined as a more sustainable land development pattern than the conventional method currently used in most areas. It incorporates a suite of landscaping and design techniques known as "Better Site Design" that attempt to maintain the natural, pre-development hydrology of a site and the surrounding watershed. An important LID principle is the idea that stormwater is not merely a waste product to be disposed of, but rather that rainwater is a resource.. LID also integrates a range of structural best management practices(BMPs)for road design and stormwater and wastewater management systems that minimize environmental impacts (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006: 1-2). These guidelines seek to prevent environmental impacts rather than having to mitigate for them; . minimize the use of regional conveyance systems; preserve natural areas; reduce impact on watershed hydrology;utilize less complex,non-structural methods to lower cost and maintenance; and create a multifunctional landscape. Low Impact Design Guidelines design measures will be adopted in road design, home site locations, gulch buffers, general erosion and sedimentation control, re-direction of roof runoff to storage or use areas, wastewater treatment, and native landscaping. III. BACKGROUND INFORMATION Pursuant to Planning Department policies, the applicant is submitting the Chapter 343 Final Environmental Assessment in lieu of the SMA application. Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact Kohala Shoreline Sig.-Lot Subdivision TMK: (3rd) 5-9-001:008 Kahuali`ili`i, North Kohala District, Hawaii Island, State of Hawaii Kohala Shoreline, LLC C August 2019 Prepared for: County of Hawaii Planning Department Aupuni Center, Suite 3 [ ' 101 Pauahi Street `� Hilo 11I96720 I ! Final Environmental Assessment j and Finding of No Significant Impact Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F t_J TMK: (3rd)5-9-001:008 Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala District,Hawaii Island, State of Hawaii I F APPLICANT: �i .Kohala Shoreline,LLC c/o Carlsmith Ball 121 Waianuenue Avenue 1 Hilo HI 96720 APPROVING AGENCY: County of Hawaii FPlanning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo HI 96720 Li CONSULTANT: FGeometrician Associates LLC PO Box 396 Hilo HI 96721 L' CLASS OF ACTION: Use of State Land F h This document is prepared pursuant to: The Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 343,Hawaii Revised Statutes(HRS),and Title 11,Chapter 200,Hawaii Department of Health Administrative Rules(HAR). F [this page intentionally left blank] C 1 O a a a TABLE OF CONTENTS -..-._-_...^-.-.-..~~-....--..--.—.~.~.........~-._,^.-...SUMMARY ���CBSS.................. l l`l Property Ownership and Project Location and Description............................. l 1.2 Environinental Assessment Process................................................................. 12 1.3 Public Involvement and Agency Coordination ............................................... 12 PART 2: ALTERNATIVES----..—.---..—..-------..---.----.-...----_.-' 14 Ell" 2 } T�r���t . ...~..---...--_ 14 . ^^ �°=~�---, ^.-.,..-~.__.--.---.-...._-..—._._._- '2.2 NoAction......................................................................................................... 14 2.3 Alternatives Evaluated and Dismissed from Further Consideration ............... 14 | \ PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION................ 15 ].T Physical Environment '''~~^^---^---'~'~'---'-'~^--'--'-'^'---^~'~—^- 15 3.I.1 Geology, Soils and Natural Hazards.................................................... 15 Ell 3'l.2 and F|oodITazurda —.--.—.—.-.------.—.---- l�3'1,3 Water Quality~_-.-,—..---~_.'—'^''^~~'`-'----^'--'-^--^--'^^` 22 3,1/4 Flora, Fauna, and Ecosystems ............................................................. 39 El 3.1.5Air.� �I � l����8�oD���� � e80l�ce@ _- -- _ - . . -- __ -~_. . . . . . . . , 4@ 3.1.8 Hazardous Materials, TmxicSzbmtaooemandHuzardoomC�»nditionm— 50 3.2 Socioeconomic and Cultural .---.—.--.-.-.--......._-._...--~..--,--. 52 | } 3.2] S ............................................................ 52 3.2.2 Coastal Recreation................................................................................. 53 3.2.3 Cultural Resources -,._.---.._._.._-,.....-....--..-...-......_' 57 \ | 3.2/4 Archaeological Resources ~...,.-.—.--^_----........''------- 71 3.3 Infrastructure ,,'...._,__.,.._.~..__,~.,__~.,~.___.--.-,~...—'..._--._-.... /h 3.3'I Utilities, Energy,Public Facilities and Public Services ...................... 76 El 3.3.2 Roadways and Traffic.......................................................................... 78 3'4 Secondary and Cumulative hnpacts--..—.-.--..---.-.---_----.--_-- 81 3.5 Required Permits and Approvals..--.--...-.--.-..,^_~,_,_~,~,,^_,..___, 83 E 3,6 Consistency with Government Plans and P8}icie8--..-,..--...-,-'~'-''-- 83 3'6.1 Hawmi^i State Plan................................................................................ 83 3.6.2 Haw8i^i State Land Use Law............................................................... 83 Ell 3.6.3 BaYvai^i County Zoning and General Plan........................................... 80 3.6/4 205a and Special Management Area...................................... 93 � 3.0.5 NmrfhKihala Community Development PToo .................................... 93 L PART 4: DETERMINATION-.—.----....--_.-..----.-..--.--..—.--_..--.-.---.. 95 PART 5: FINDINGS AND REASONS .......................................................................... 96 ( | ^^^~FE^^'~ "CE° ^^~^--^^—^-''-`-''-''^~^'---~^~^`—^^'--~-'^~--^~^-'—''~'^'------' -- U L � r` L� Environmental Assessment 8ohula Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LIST OF TABLES TABLE I Chronological Summary of Land Use History of Property Since 1997.......... 11 TABLE Lab Results of Water Chemistry Samples........................................................ 25 TABLE Potential Changes to Groundwater Discharging Along Property Shoreline.... 37 TABLE Plant Species on Property ................................................................................ 40 TABLE Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics ......................................................... 53 TABLEArchaeological Sites......................................................................................... 74 TABLE Project Peak Hour Trip Generation.................................................................. 79 LIST OF FIGURES CJ FIGURE I a General Location Map ..................................................................................... 3 FIGURElb TMK Map ........................................................................................................ 3 FIGURE2 Property Photos ............................................................................................... 4 FIGURE 3 Conceptual Site Plan ....................................................................................... 5 FIGURE 4 Landscape Concept.......................................................................................... 7 FIGURE 5a Flood Insurance Rate Map............................................................................... 17 FIGURE 5b Sea Level Rise Exposure Map ......................................................................... 22 FIGURE 6 Keawewai Gulch Drainage Basin .................................................................... 24 FIGURE 7 Sedimentation into Ocean after Rain Event from Gulches on Kohala Mt....... 24 FIGURE 8 Water Chemistry Sample Sites......................................................................... 26 FIGURE 9 Simulated Views from Road and Ocean.......................................................... 51 FIGURE 10 Archaeological Sites ....................................................................................... 73 FIGURE 11 Regional Land Use Designations ................................................................... 84 FIGURE12 Zoning Map .................................................................................................... 85 FIGURE13 LUPAG Map .................................................................................................. 87 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX la Comments in Response to Early Consultation APPENDIX lb Comments to Draft EA and Responses BUJ APPENDIX 2 Biological Report APPENDIX 3 Cultural Impact Assessment APPENDIX 4 Archaeological Inventory Survey and Related Correspondence APPENDIX 5 Supplemental Design Concepts for Erosion and Sedimentation Control APPENDIX 6 Marine Research Consultants Baseline Data,November 2015 APPENDIX 7 Water Resources Impact Assessment Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision ' i F1 SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION, I � ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Kohala Shoreline, LLC proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision makai of the Akoni Pule Highway (State Route 270)on a 37.88-acre parcel located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae �- Harbor. The lots would vary.in size from about 5 to 8 acres,with all building sites located mauka of the ala loa(old coastal trail)/jeep road. The current proposal replaces one from 2015 that had 50 percent more density and included several building sites below the ala loa. A Special Management Area Use Permit and a change of zone will be required. The property site is currently zoned Single- s Family Residential(RS-15),which would be modified to Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a)to permit larger lots and less dense development when residences are built. Similar developments are located nearby at Kohala Ranch,Kohala Kai Subdivision and at Kohala by the Sea Subdivision. Road access would be from two permitted access locations along the highway, although one of i these locations is proposed to be moved to avoid a gulch crossing. The lots would be provided with internal access and underground electricity,telephone and water service from existing lines along the highway. The future homes would utilize individual wastewater systems designed pursuant to Ell State Health Department requirements and would exceed those requirements by installing aerobic treatment systems,which produce a higher quality effluent that can be utilized for irrigation. The E. project includes public parking and a mauka-makai shoreline access, as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. It is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa,which meanders through the makai third of the property. To translate the owner's mission statement of sustainable development to practical E measures,the project has adopted a number of design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to environmental permits. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions will require n adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design(LID) Guidelines. U A botanical survey conducted on the property found no threatened or endangered plant species. En Vegetation consists of introduced species, except for several common plants indigenous to Hawaii. Implementation of archaeological preservation, data recovery plans and burial treatment plans,in consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division and the Office of Hawaiian Affairs,will E mitigate impacts to historic sites. Cultural impacts on traditional and customary gathering rights along the shoreline will be avoided by the large shoreline buffer area below the ala loa and public access provisions that will preserve the landscape and cultural uses of the shoreline area. in the unlikely event that additional archaeological resources or human remains are encountered during future development activities,work in the immediate area of the discovery will be halted. The home sites would be located on land with a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees, a U minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway, a minimum of 40 feet in elevation, and a minimum of _ 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road. Covenants will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and will require ' a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. Due to these design features,low density/large lots and the sloping nature of the site,the project would have only minor visual impacts for drivers on Akoni Pule Highway looking toward the sea. The project is not expected to have a negative impact on coastal water resources, as it would be low-density,with homes utilizing iii — Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L c� advanced wastewater systems and separated from the ocean by the wide shoreline setback,with substantial measures to control sedimentation to be low current levels. Kohala Shoreline, LLC,understands that the Hawaii County Planning Department,based on its review of the document and comments to the Draft EA and responses to them,has determined that the proposed action,will not significantly alter the environment asim �pacts will be minimal and that this agency will accordingly issue a Finding of No Significant Impact tFONSP. MITIGATION SUMMARY The following measures have been developed either as intrinsic to the design or as mitigation to avoid,reduce or offset adverse impacts, as discussed in the Draft EA. They are expected to be required as part of conditions for various permit approvals and/or carried forward, as amended by regulators, as Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs). These measures will be updated as part of the Final EA after review and comment by agencies and the public. They are summarized here for the convenience of regulators for future approvals and for final CC&R formulation. WILDFIRE MITIGATION 1. Vegetation at the edge of each building pad will be kept low to act as a fuelbreak in order to reduce the spread of fire on or off the property. 2. The shoulder of the entrance roads will be mowed to reduce fuel buildup, and no parking will be allowed on these roads in order to avoid ignition from catalytic converters. 3. The entrance roads will have fire hydrants to assist in fighting not only house fires but wildfires, should they originate on or off the property. FLOODING, WATER QUALITY,AND CLIMATE CHANGE 1. All house pads would be set back from the shoreline at a minimum elevation of about 40 feet above sea level (and generally above 50 feet), outside the VE flood zone. 2. All six residences would be required to utilize advanced individual wastewater treatment units such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment(CBT) system. 3. Information concerning the tsunami and dam hazard zones and appropriate evacuation procedures will be provided to all lot purchasers and an evacuation plan will be developed and included. 4. A detailed drainage study of the development will be submitted for review and approval by the Department of Public Works, in conjunction with submittal of plans for subdivision review. Drainage structures will be constructed to capture and retain the increase in rainfall runoff generated by the development. 5. All homes must be built to withstand Hurricane Category 2 force winds. 6. Any culverts within the subdivision that might be built will be oversized to accommodate the 100-year rather than 50-year storm. iv Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LJ 7. In association with grading permits and an NPDES permit,the project engineer will complete a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SVYTPP)that will effectively manage storm water runoff through emplacement of appropriate best management practices (BMPs) 8. In addition,the project will adopt certain protocols for grading of the lots similar to those in I Ll 1 the Recommended Construction Best Management Practices(BMPs) for Land Disturbance of Less Than One Acre that was approved by Board of Directors of the Kohala Ranch Community Association, on August 9,2007. 9. The project engineer will also explore the use of"mini-sediment basins", as successfully implemented in the Kohala Estates subdivision, in order to achieve the goals of the SVvTPP and the additional Recommended Construction Best Management Practices. 10. A variety of additional specific site design,measures derived from U.S. Green Building Council(USGBC)requirements,which are consistent with the State CZM Program's Low Impact Design(LID) Guidelines,will be implemented to specifically accomplish 1) limitation of site disturbance; 2) a less engineered approach to site grading; 3)maximization of percolation and minimization of runoff, including re-direction of roof runoff to storage or use areas; and 4) alternative approaches to slope retention/stabilization. BIOLOGY 1. To minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat,the removal or trimming of woody plants taller than 15 feet will be prohibited from June 1 to September 15 each year. 2. To avoid the potential downing of seabirds by interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting will be permitted after dark between the months of April and October, and all permanent lighting will be shielded in conformance with Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance(Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14). U VISUAL IMPACT 1. Future homes on the lots will be located a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway and ;F 100 feet mauka of the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road. 2. All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. 3. No ground disturbance or structures by the owner or lot owners will be allowed makai of the 1 L, ala loa(old coastal trail). 4. The project will include gradual planting of native vines and herbs near the shoreline in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the public access area, but there will be no landscaping with trees or shrubs by the developer or property owners makai of the ala loa 5. The height of homes will be restricted to 25 feet, and the color scheme for homes and i L_J outbuildings will utilize earth-tones. 6. Xerophytic landscaping will be installed along the development's two internal roadways and also on residents' lots. v Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Sithdivision L 7. Kiawe trees will be retained as practical, and all trees will be limited to a height of 35 feet, similar to the existing kiawe tree landscape, as large trees would be out of place in this xeric landscape and require inordinate amounts of irrigation water. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 1. During construction, drip pans will be placed beneath vehicles not in use in order to trap vehicle fluids, and any significant leaks or spills that occur will be promptly cleaned with disposal at an approved site. 2. Precautions would be undertaken by contractors in the context of the project construction Best Management Practices for the appropriate response and remediation should any [� heretofore unknown hazardous,toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during construction of the project. PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION 1. The project includes a four-stall public parking area that would be open from a half-hour before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset,which would access a new 800-foot long, 10-foot wide mauka-makai pedestrian trail. 2. The continuous lateral shoreline easement near the shoreline will remain in place,but the development will also cooperate with the National Park Service and DLNR's Na Ala Hele IJ Program so that these agencies may develop the ala loa as an additional lateral shoreline access that is expected to become part of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. IIJ CULTURAL AND ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES 1. To avoid potential impacts to the cultural value of burial sites present on the property, a burial treatment plan will be prepared in compliance with HAR §13-300. 2. To avoid potential adverse impacts to the cultural value of the preservation sites, and to enhance the preservation, interpretive and cultural values of these sites, archaeological data recovery and preservation plans will be prepared and implemented. 3. Throughout plan development,native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES 1. The owner will make fair share contributions to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the subdivision with respect to parks and recreation, fire,police, solid waste disposal facilities, and roads. The owner will comply with the County's Affordable Housing LJ Ordinance and thus contribute to affordable housing in the repion. 2. The owner will prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval. 3. The owner will make intersection improvements to be determined in consultation with the Department of Transportation. U vi Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision i I PART l: PROJECT DESCRIPTION,LOCATION,AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS L_J 1.1 Property Ownership and Project Location and Description Kohala Shoreline, LLC ("Kohala Shoreline"or"the owner")proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision(the project)within its 37.88-acre property at TMK(3) 5-9-001:008 atKahuali'ili'i, North Kohala, County and State of Hawaii(the"property"or"subject property")located along -' Akoni Pule Highway(State Route 270), approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor (Figures 1-4). L_iI The property is within the County's Special Management Area(SMA), and an SMA Use Permit application will be processed with the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission(Planning Commission). A change of zone application from the current Single-Family Residential (RS-15) zoning district to the Residential and Agricultural (RA-5a)zoning district will be concurrently n processed through the Planning Commission and the County Council. The owner may or may not �J elect to pursue a variance,Planned Unit Development or any other administrative permit to modify road standards, lot sizes or other design elements during the subdivision or development process. Li The current proposal replaces a previous one from 2015.Notice of the Draft EA for the first project was published in the July 8,2015 edition of The Environmental Notice.As part of the review El process,the project team received a number of comments on concerns including density, lot configuration,public access,historic sites, cultural practices,water use, drainage and marine water quality. The owner carefully considered the comments and decided not to implement the project as 1 proposed, and instead decided to design a new concept with substantial changes that responded to these concerns.Accordingly,the original Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact(DEA-AFONSI) for the project was withdrawn on September 23,2018. n The current project is substantially different from the one proposed in 2015. The former project had 50 percent more density(9 lots instead of 6) and included several building sites nearer the shoreline makai of the ala loa(old coastal trail). To further reduce the footprint, all on-site roads, other than the cul-de sac on the north entry and stub road on the south entry,were removed and replaced with driveways,which disturb much less area and decrease potential runoff. The design specifications for the current project express low impact design, and include more safeguards to decrease water use, minimize wastewater impacts and prevent erosion and sedimentation during occupation of the homes. It also proposes to set aside a roughly 10-acre area from the ala loatjeep road to the shoreline as an easement that would serve as a substantial visual buffer for the shoreline area that will support gathering and fishing. The Mission Statement for the owner of the property expresses the intent to develop and utilize the L property with a minimum of impact: Our mission is to set a new standard of stewardship for new, small-scale, coastal housing clusters for twenty first century Hawaii. L 1 Environmental4ssessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision 1 l_J Hawaii is blessed with pristine beauty and rich biodiversity. Traditionally, its people lived in harmony with the land and the sea,protecting the natural wonderments that make Hawaii such an extraordinary place.To this end,we will work to protect and preserve the sensitive natural landscapes and seascapes along the Hawaiian coastline. Furthermore,we will serve as good neighbors to the local communities,respecting their values and cultural traditions. We believe that the built environment must be mindful of its intrusion into, and its framing within,the natural environment. We will build an environmentally healthy house that minimizes its impacts to the earth and possesses an aesthetic beauty in balance with its natural surroundings. To lessen the negative climate impacts caused by conventional structures,we will use best practices in design for energy efficiency and functionality, and for low carbon production and natural resource consumption.Natural materials such as wood and stone will be sustainably harvested, and all manufactured materials used will be environmentally sensitive. We will use construction methods that avoid or mitigate disruptions to the local ecology and wildlife, as well as to the archeological history of those who lived on this land before us. This mission is a commitment made by ourselves, and by our partners in design and construction. We will ask our future neighbors on the property to join us in following this mission as well. To translate this mission statement to practical measures,the project will adopt a number of design and mitigation measures that far exceed requirements related to environmental permits. CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID)Guidelines (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006). While not all design guidelines are appropriate to any given site, one principle that connects all LID practices is sustainability: LID is defined as a more sustainable land development pattern than the conventional method currently used in most areas. It incorporates a suite of landscaping and design techniques known as "Better Site Design"that attempt to maintain the natural,pre-development hydrology of a site and the surrounding watershed. An important LID principle is the idea that stormwater is not merely a waste product to be disposed of,but rather that rainwater is a �l resource. LID also integrates a range of structural best management practices (BMPs)for -J road design and stormwater and wastewater management systems that minimize rJ environmental impacts (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006: 1-2). These guidelines seek to prevent environmental impacts rather than having to mitigate for them; minimize the use of regional conveyance systems;preserve natural areas;reduce impact on watershed hydrology;utilize less complex,non-structural methods to lower cost and maintenance; and create a multifunctional landscape. Low Impact Design Guidelines design measures will be adopted in road design,home site locations, �.J gulch buffers, general erosion and sedimentation control,re-direction of roof runoff to storage or r a use areas,wastewater treatment, and native landscaping. The reader is referred to Sections 3.1.2, U 3.1.3, 3.1.4, 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 for detailed discussion. 2 U Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U Figure Ya® General Location lea G u m J, 'F q F,' 31 'I SUbjeCf EoYopeMy, cI�t' d'� s t � y� i /Pla 1 } ulml o r 0 b'YB d f� $?PrtC Pvttt.a�Pr �^-- ry_✓r/���. Y. r "✓ i91i mE, i94.cu r,�E. _a mE. enl spam E, e05 ou 2061 mE. 1120o rr�E, zl5 auo.�E. :16'so mE. 2., rrE, 0 o iu�ioo 0 1 2 3 4� o v :-�soo or _. TN�IINl1 5 0 Z mlry 10` 0 2 4 G R4�iI0w i� c led mlfi TOPO�fv R]001Ii innul Geope Aic(vrnw ruf�a;�k: tii;.rcnho o) Figure lbo TMK Map Ohala . 4 .A KO)a a pus x i w"° Kohala Ka6 At .SJ A" 1 Subject fI ,r Property a'KohaPa Ka,Access North 3 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Figure 2 Property Photos F",, e„ „ rd�rri � � ff/G✓ � Jnrv1 1 r r r/� � (J y r 1 l rel r I r t i a r ,. U� ,mw�a�,J1 »J?�l.� ��✓f I�-r f�Yaz � � ", ,,.1 i a. Typical Landscape,wflth ala t®cz/Jeep road A V b HPA Students Invesite Meteorology wr�,rrervD J1'�jt�c'l�'ll/fir/ii ri l off//�I�JYn���ir��lY�irr �%ym����� r i r r�,yy�/ ��//���//✓ r /1/ll rr vrr/�i/lrrr/i�� / jj�',��,// � r� �✓ // r rr r �iyll//f���/��� > - /,+/ rt ,�,�,,,,,�,,, . �/; ,dict,✓„r/ ( � I n A,(P V+ c. Shoreline 4 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I LIJ s II I 1 1 w wLu uYfR j7� L11 ua l t/O.e > o t LLJ ' U Pte- �. �,� 1� •'/--`'„� '� f``_-' —"'2,1.. i ,.�� U. W w �.r � i t � I LU uj i Ww �_ �t moi! 1, W 1, ui 0 ca ui to,tuLIJ F- I LU ui Ul 1 d l O w W =D uj e/ m OZd v? cq s n= h- _" e in CSL., 1 r- �� ��) w F- in W W I.1_ 6 z Uj �W LLJ HON gjg z Z w j > i 0 0 � � 4 I ,I W U •/ / r `I r Z/ Nr� 1 1 1 b � r 1 1 [This page intentionally left blank] E _l Fag. 4a Landscape Concept ^y h �+ I(auna"ba and Pdhuehue, spreading over near- shoreline wave deposits f i AR ��. (Cuscuta sandwichiana and � Ipomoea pes-caprae) a _ J 1 i P� x , r m ,4kulikuti and ®halo Kai, �r low-lying on bare rock y „ (Sesuvium portulacastrum and t ycium T �r sandwicense) n r Io 1 � `Ilirna low stature or spreading r I (Sida fallax) 7 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Fig® 4b Landscape Concept ✓1 u,, air, �;,�e.,�h' r ;� � >" �r ��^�k'„' 'y.. P ®u- o i®iaka draping over low cliffs near shoreline (faCquemOntla avalifoha) lw 9 r w v i t i i r r , r r” Endangered "Ihi with white flowers a (Portulaca villosa) 2 Photo courtesy Forest and Kim Starr h „< a 8 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Fig. 4c Landscape Concept lena sprawling l and draping over rocks P� I (Boerhavia repens) Photo courtesy Forest and Kim 1 Starr 1 n Low U F q� , o p. i �w ,n H , bushes of silvery hinahina w x (Heliotropium anomalum) Photo courtesy Forest and Kim Starr ' 9 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision tJ _J The property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential,with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet(RS-15),under Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02. SMA Permit 379,which allowed for development of a 50-lot subdivision,was issued for the property but is in technical default for failure to timely comply with certain conditions of approval. Table I provides a history of zoning and SMA actions for the property. Upon reviewing the property and development options,the U owner determined that a less dense development would be more in keeping with surrounding zoning and land uses and his Mission Statement. The owner is therefore proposing a change of zone to Fi Residential and Agricultural 5-acres (RA-5a), which would decrease potential density from 50 lots U on which residences would eventually be built down to six lots, ranging in size from about 5 to 8 acres,reducing the impacts associated with denser development. The scale of the lots and would be similar to the A-3a and A-5a zoned lots immediately upslope at Kohala Ranch. Ul Road access would be from two locations along the highway, as shown in Figure 3. The project has two existing permitted access points, one opposite Kohala Ranch Road and the other approximately 980 feet to the south. Because the southern third of the property is separated from the remainder by Keawewai Gulch, which,under the present access situation,would require construction of a bridge or large culvert,the plan calls for relocating the southern road access point approximately 300 feet further south. The project would be served with underground water, electrical, and telephone service from existing lines located within a utility easement along Akoni Pule Highway. For wastewater treatment and disposal, all six residences would be required by Covenants, Conditions F1 and Restrictions(CC&Rs)to utilize advanced individual wastewater treatment units such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment(CBT) system. These systems meet and exceed the requirements of the State Department of Health,reduce the level of residual nutrients, and also produce a higher quality effluent that can be utilized for irrigation, further reducing the subsidy of nutrients to the groundwater. A number of design features combined with the natural landscape will help avoid visual impacts for motorists on the highway and those on the shoreline. CC&Rs that are proposed to be further 0, codified within future change of zone and SMA approval conditions will require future homes on the lots to be located a minimum of 150 feet makai of the highway and 100 feet mauka of the shoreline,mauka of the ala Ioa1j eep road. CC&Rs will also restrict the homes' height to 25 feet as U measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code and mandate a color scheme featuring earth-tones to minimize visual impacts. This land has a moderate slope and scattered kiawe trees that will assist in obscuring the homes. Landscaping will be installed by the owner along the subdivision's entry gate area and two short entrance roadways, and by residents on their lots, subject to CC&Rs that would also require that trees be limited to a height of 35 'feet, similar to the existing kiawe tree landscape. Large trees would be out of place in this xeric landscape and require inordinate amounts of irrigation water,which is not in keeping with the owner's sustainable mission statement.Note that the erosion and sedimentation measures that will be adopted as part of the CC&Rs would also require retaining kiawe trees to the maximum practicable degree. The project includes public parking and a mauka- makai shoreline access, as well as a continuous lateral shoreline access in the form of an existing easement near the shoreline. Based on the history of coordination with the National Park Service, it is also expected that the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail will utilize the ala loa,which 10 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Table 1. Chronological Summary of Land Use History of Property Since 1997 No. Date Action 1 July 14, Effective date for Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102,which rezoned 37.88 acres of land 1997 from Agricultural 5-acre(A-5a)to a Single-Family Residential(RS-15)zoned district. 2 August 8, SMA Use Permit No.379 granted by the Planning Commission(PC)to allow the development i_j 1997 of a 50-lot single family residential subdivision and related improvements 3 May 31, Letter informing the applicant that the Planning Director(PD)will be initiating the rezoning of 2007 the property from a RS-15 to a Residential and Agricultural 5-acre(RA-5a)district and will initiate the revocation of SMA Use Permit No.379. 4 June 5, Kohala LLC submitted a request for a 5-year time extension from July 14,2007 until July 14, 2007 2012 to comply with Condition C(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102 and Condition No.4(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit No.379. 5 July 7, The PC Commission considered Kohala LLC's request for a 5-year extension for Condition No. 2007 4(secure Final Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit No.379. A motion was made to Li approve the PD's denial recommendation,which did not pass. Additionally,the PC considered the PD-initiated request to revoke SMA 379. A motion was made to approve the PD's initiated revocation,which did not pass. The PC voted to continue the matters until August 31,2007. 6 August 31, Kohala LLC requested a continuance until the nextW hearing in October to allow time to Li 2007 review information received from the Planning Department. The next Kona meeting was held on December 12,2007. 7 December The PC voted to continue Kohala LLC's amendment request of Condition No.4(secure Final 12,2007 Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit 379 and the Planning Director's initiated request to revoke SMA Use Permit No.379 until March 20,2008 to allow both parties to submit proposed Findings of Fact,Conclusions of Law and Decision and Order. 8 March 20, The PC voted to continue Kohala LLC's amendment request of Condition No.4(secure Final 2008 Subdivision Approval)of SMA Use Permit 379 and the PD-initiated request to revoke SMA Use Permit No.379 until April 18,2008. 9 April 18, The PC considered the applicant's request for an amendment to Condition C(time to secure 2008 Final Subdivision Approval)of Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102. A motion to send a favorable recommendation to the County Council did not pass. Additionally,the PC considered the request for an amendment to Condition 4(time to secure Final Subdivision approval)of Special Management Area(SMA)Use Permit No.379,which allowed the development of a 50- LJ lot single family residential subdivision. A motion to deny the request did not pass. The applicant requested an opportunity for final reconsideration of this matter pursuant to PC Rule No.9-11 F)(3). L 10 May 22, The PC Chairman deferred the reconsideration of the amendment request for Condition No.4 of 2008 SMA 379 and the PD-initiated revocation of SMA No.379 until the County Council decides on its initiation of rezoning the subject parcel from a Single-Family Residential-15,000 square foot L (RS-15)to a Residential and Agricultural-15 acre(RA-15a)zoned district. 11 September The Hawaii County Council passed the second and final reading of Bill 237(Draft 2),which 24,2008 repealed Change of Zone Ordinance No.97-102 and changed the zoning from RS-15 to RA- 15a. L 12 October 13, Mayor Harry Kim vetoed Bill 237(Draft 2)stating his reasons and requested that the Council 2008 - reconsider the RA-5a zoning. 13 November The Hawaii County Council failed to override the Mayor's veto. 7,2008 14 November The PC Chairman deferred the reconsideration of the amendment request for Condition No.4 of 24,2008 SMA 379 and the PD-initiated revocation of SMA 379 until such time that the rezoning of the property is decided upon by the County Council or by the August 2009 Leeward Planning Commission meeting,whichever occurs first. 15 July 27, The applicant submitted a letter regarding the status of applications to the Planning Department. 2009 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision D F! meanders through the makai third of the property(see Figure 3). This will provide a critical public trail connection from trail segments that extend from the private lands in the Kawaihae area north to State lands in North Kohala.No homes or any other construction would be permitted makai of the ala loa. The project will also include gradual landscaping in selected areas near the shoreline intended to restore native herbs and vines in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the area(Figure 4). 1.2 Environmental Assessment Process Because the project involves discretionary permits in the form of a Change of Zone and a Special F Management Area Use Permit, its use of land within State rights-of-way for utility and access U connections triggers the need for an Environmental Assessment analyzing these connections and the associated development pursuant to Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS),Hawai'i's EIS law. This Environmental Assessment(EA)process is being conducted in accordance with HRS U Chapter 343. This law, along with its implementing regulations, Title 11, Chapter 200, of the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), is the basis for the environmental impact process in the State F, of Hawaii. According to HRS Chapter 343, an EA is prepared to determine impacts associated with an action,to develop mitigation measures for adverse impacts, and to determine whether any of the impacts are significant according to thirteen specific criteria. Part 4 of this document states the findings that no significant impacts are expected to occur;Part 5 lists each criterion and presents the preliminary findings for each made by the County of Hawaii Planning Department,the approving agency. If, after considering comments to the Draft EA, the approving agency concludes that, as anticipated,no significant impacts would be expected to occur, the agency will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact(FONSI), and the action will be permitted to proceed to necessary permits and approvals. If the agency concludes that significant impacts are expected to occur as a result of the proposed action, an Environmental Impact Statement(EIS)will be prepared. 1.3 Public Involvement and Agency Coordination Based on jurisdiction, expertise, and expressed interest,the following agencies and organizations U were consulted in various stages of the development of the environmental assessment: Federal: National Park Service,Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail State: Department of Land and Natural Resources Department of Health Department of Transportation,Highways Division,Hawaii District Office of Hawaiian Affairs,Honolulu and West Hawaii State Historic Preservation Division 12 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision r-, L. i i County: Civil Defense Agency County Council Department of Public Works Department of Environmental Management Department of Water Supply Planning Department Police Department Fire Department WPrivate: Sierra Club,Moku Loa Group North Kohala Community Access Group Ell- North Kohala Community Development Plan_Action Committee Kailapa Community Association South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club W Residents: U Jack Hoyt Susan Wells Fischer Diane Kaneali`i Keoni Mackillop Keith Wallis Toni Withington Ell Copies of communications received during early consultation are contained in Appendix 1 a.As discussed in Section 3.2.3,throughout the history of the original project and continuing to the LJ present project,the project team has attended several meetings of the North Kohala Community Access Group and held several field visits for this and other community groups.Notice of the availability of the Draft EA was published in the May 8 2419 OEOC Environmental Notice. 011 Appendixlb contains written comments on the Draft EA and the responses to these comments. Various places in the EA have been modified to reflect input received in the comment letters _„ additional or modified non-procedural text is denoted by double underlines as in this parara�h. W it 13 .Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision W U, 0 PART 2: ALTERNATIVES 2.1 Proposed Project As detailed in Section 1.1, the proposed project is development of a 6-lot subdivision and related Ll improvements,with vehicular access and utility connections within the State of Hawai'i's Akoni Pule Highway right-of-way(see Figure 3 for conceptual lot layout). It would involve a change of zone from Single-Family Residential minimum lot size 15,000 square feet(RS-15)to Residential- Agricultural minimum lot size 5 acres (the original zoning density of the property before it was changed to RS-15) and a Special Management Area Use Permit. It is expected that each lot would eventually be developed with a residence and accessory uses. 2.2 No Action Under the No Action Alternative, development of the property as discussed above would not occur. This would avoid any adverse environmental impacts related to the development. It would also preclude economic benefits including jobs, income, and tax revenues associated with the development; environmental benefits such as sediment reduction and native species revegetation; and social benefits such as enhancement of public access on an improved trail parallel to the shoreline. The No Action Alternative forms the baseline against which environmental impacts associated with the proposed action are measured. 2.3 Alternatives Evaluated and Dismissed from Further Consideration As stated in Section 1.1,the property is currently zoned Single-Family Residential,with minimum ri lot size of 15,000 square feet(RS-15),which could allow up to 110 dwelling units. The Planning Li Commission previously issued SNLA,Use Permit No. 379 (SMA 379) allowing a 50-lot single- family residential subdivision(see Table 1). SMA 379 is in technical default for failure to timely comply with certain conditions of approval. Upon reviewing the property and development options, the owner determined that a less dense development alternative of 6 lots would decrease many of the impacts associated with the density permitted under RS-15 zoning and would also be more in keeping with his Mission Statement and the surrounding zoning and land uses. Therefore, a higher density alternative using existing zoning is not being considered at the present time and is not being advanced in this Environmental Assessment. If the proposed rezoning is not approved,the owner may in the future consider a higher-density development consistent with the current RS-15 zoning, at which time the owner would comply with all applicable requirements of HRS Chapter 343. The owner does not envision any other development scenarios that could reasonably satisfy its objectives and vision for the property, and therefore none are advanced or analyzed.As stated previously, a project previously proposed by Kohala Shoreline LLC was 50 percent denser,with nine lots, and included several building sites near the shoreline makai of the ala loa. This design concept would be much less satisfactory in meeting the environmental and community goals of the project and is no longer under consideration as an alternative. Ujl 14 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING,IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Ljj 7 Basic Geographic Setting J The Kohala Shoreline, LLC property is referred to throughout this EA as the property. The term project area is used to describe the general environs in this area of Kohala. The property is a 37.88-acre parcel in the State Land Use Urban District, located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. It reaches from the shoreline to approximately 160 feet above sea level,makai of the State-owned Akoni Pule Highway(see Figures 1-3). Adjacent land use is primarily rural residential and agricultural lots,with scattered undeveloped properties. The surface of the project area has been partially disturbed previously by ranching and fire, and the vegetation is composed of almost entirely of two non-native species, kiawe trees and buffet grass. The property is bounded by Akoni Pule Highway and Kohala Ranch subdivision to the east,the sea to the west,undeveloped State land to the north, and the Kohala Kai subdivision to the south. 3.1 Physical Environment 3.1.1 Geology, Soils and Natural Hazards Environmental Setting Ell; Geologically,the property is located on the flanks of Kohala Volcano. The surface consists of a lava flow that erupted more than 120,000 years before the present(Wolfe and Morris 1996). The property soil is classified by the U.S.Natural Resources Conservation Service(formerly Soil Conservation Service) as Kawaihae very rocky,very fine sandy loam (KOC). The KOC soil is typically found up to 2 inches thick, underlain by up to 31 inches of stony loam, on slopes of 6 to 12 percent. This pH neutral soil typically contains up to 30%rock outcroppings. Permeability and erosion hazard are moderate, and runoff is medium. The capability subclass for KOC is VHs,which L denotes soils with very severe limitations that make them very unsuited for cultivation and restrict their use to mainly pasture and woodland(U.S. Soil Conservation Service 1973). It is unclassified in the Agricultural Lands of Importance in the State of Hawaii maps, and the Land Study Bureau 1. 1 classifies the land as E or''Very Poor."Both ratings indicate the land's poor agricultural potential. The Island of Hawaii experiences high seismic activity and is at risk from major earthquake damage(USGS 2000), especially to structures that are poorly designed or built. On October 15, 2006,two damaging earthquakes of magnitude 6.7 and 6.0 struck the west side of Hawaii Island, causing extensive damage in West Hawaii. An even stronger magnitude 6.9 quake occurred under Kilauea Volcano on May 3,2018.None of these earthquakes caused more than minimal damage to the property. Volcanic hazard as assessed by the U.S. Geological Survey at the property is Zone 9, on a scale of ascending risk from 9 to I (Heliker 1990:23). The low hazard risk is based on the fact that Kohala Volcano,the oldest volcano on the island,has not erupted for 60,000 years and is possibly extinct. The property does not appear to be subject to subsidence, landslides or other forms of mass wasting. 15 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F1 Wildfire is an important concern in this part of North Kohala,which has burned on several occasions owing to arson, car exhaust, campfires and firecrackers, among other causes. Fires started P on this property may harm not only the owner's property but nearby land as well, including Kohala Ranch and State lands immediately adjacent to the north. [J Impacts and Mitigation Measures In general, soil and geologic conditions impose no constraints, and the proposed use is reasonable. Appropriate seismic standards would be adhered to during construction,per building codes. F1Vegetation at the edge of each building pad will be kept low to act as a fuelbreak to reduce the spread of fire on or off the property. Entrance road shoulders will be mowed to reduce fuel buildup, and no parking will be allowed on these roads in order to avoid ignition from catalytic converters. Finally,the entrance roads will have fire hydrants to assist in fighting not only house fires but L wildfires, should they originate on or off the property. Water service will be provided to each lot for potable and irrigation uses, and irrigated vegetation will have less potential to ignite or spread fires. 3.1.2 Climate,Drainage and Flood Hazards Existing Environment The climate in the project area is mild and arid, with a mean annual rainfall of about 10 inches and a mean annual temperature of 75 degrees (Giambelluca et al 2014; U.H. Hilo-Geography 1998:57). Maps of wind energy potential produced by Hawaiian Electric indicate that this area of Kohala has average wind speeds of less than 12 mph 20 mph at 50 meters in height (https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/documents/clean—energy_jiawaii/renewable—energy sources/ha waii—county__4awaii—island­SPD_50m_l9ju1y_04.pdf)As discussed in detail below in this section,the world's climate is changing and requires consideration in any development. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 1551660128C (9/16/1988)indicates that the majority of the property is in Flood Zone X, areas of minimal flood hazard(Figure 5a). A narrow portion of the shoreline along the property is in Flood Zone VE, indicating the 100-year flood coastal,high-hazard floodplain, incorporating storm surge inundation. The base flood elevation is 35 feet.No home development is planned within this area,which is well below the minimum elevation of approximately 40 feet for all proposed home sites. The project area has no perennial freshwater bodies,but the property has five gulches with ephemeral streams. Only Keawewai Gulch is named. Four single culverts and one double culvert carry storm runoff from mauka lands under Akoni Pule Highway across the property and into the normally dry gulches towards the shoreline. These deep gulches do not overflow their banks, represent only minimal flood hazard, and are not mapped on the FIRMs. Preliminary consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOS) indicates that Keawewai Gulch and one of the unnamed gulches are jurisdictional waters of the U.S. under, Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Any work resulting in the discharge and/or placement of fill within a jurisdictional water requires a Section 404 permit. Permitting is treated in the impacts discussion in this section. 16 Li Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Figure 5a® Flood Insurance Rate Map I , . r r' f F � I - � raa s „ice l 0 .5F I ) I I r w F,Y Flood Hazard Assessment Report I uq vvwrw_h axyifilnfip.Gtg 9PEC'IAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS(SFHAS)SUBJECT TO INUNDATION BY l!1 'f 8 THE 1 ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD -The 1%annual chance flood(10D- -- aPso knew as the base flood,is the flood that ties a 1%tlhance of equaled rnr exceeded in any given year.£FHAs md.de Zone A,AE, F.H..AO,V,and VE-The Base Flood Elv tion(BFE(is the water surface 88snelevation of the Yid annual chance flood. Mandatory flood ens—os rty PropeInformation Nzone Notes: purchase applies iji these s: COUNTY: ii HAWAII Zone A No BFE determined. y '10,NO: (315-9-O01-006 Bons AE:SPE determined- t L4/ATERSHc'D: KEAi'JAfd U'. PARCEL ADDRESS: 59-425 AKONI P ULE HIGH WAY Zone AH:Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usua!y areas of ponding}; N.Ai1UELA,H'96743 BFE determined. Hazard Information Zone AO Flood depths of 1 to 3 feet(usually sheet flow on Flood hazard nformation sloping terrain),average depths determined. FIRM INDEX DAM: SEPTEFa ER 29,2017 Zane W:Coastal flood zone y i*,velocity hazard(wave acd-an LETTER OF MAP CHANCE(Stj: NONE no BFE dere—hed. FEMA FIRM PAxdEL 1551660155F Zone VE:Coasta flood zone with�. 1-ity hazard{wave action){ BFE determined PANEL EFFECTIVE DA E: 9EPTEIdHER 29 20L7 Zane AEF Flood ray.,.as in Zone AE The food—y is the ch nnel of nem plus any adjacent floodpla n.,.as that ril be kept free f oechraent to that'h _-+n annual chance flood can be carried Mthout Increasing the Bc'E. I NOWSPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA-An area in a low-tc-mcderata risk 6 _ LHIS P6.OPERTY IS A WITH IATSINA?.EJ4W1.N 1.11E YES flood zone No damry flood i—rance,purchase requ'wrament5 app+y, [ FOR PADRE INFO,VISIT:http tfw—.de ha..o.go'v,( but eover+_is—ilab',e in participating cornmunities. THIS PROPERT'd I-NATHI:N A DAM EVALUATION ZONE YES{HA-0147) Zane XS(%shaded).Areas aO ,annual chance flood;areas of FOP.MORE IN 0'11SIT:Mttp,tdlnreng ha,vau go.rdamj 1%annual chance flood Orth a age depths of less than Y foot or with dralnage areas less than 1 square turtle, and areas f Iwntected by Ieoeesftom Sri annual thence flood. ;♦ Zane X Areas determined to be outside the 0.294 annual chamce 6 6N 1,20C'ft floodpla n. 01-6-The H,, c Dephrhnnerr q,1_a. dPer.e,Ro-cea OLJal ass.. s.te p.sbfic'l fpm 47HER FLOOD AREAS the ,ov_u ti mcfet and timer ss of any "o rnadon co a d m this ort, +.� n are _,Pc -fbrvan,fdrigthe mccu.�aa,fuhe mformora^and oo'ae m'm' ryxaaDihR,itstd—dridamefey- eos f_,r-y Udbii.hy w.Indn mmy,¢rui,fr m is ase f its-To o,.fro mccc- i�j� �; Zone D:Unst d ad a where flood hazards are undet -.. If thi;ma hm-beao/der, a FR_.M`.:1RV; cse rat-chat.[L taF-/ '1111— �1rz ri i.-.l mined,but fi oda g r P ssible No mandemry flood rn nce ._. P died as'A P s 3 Pro icad fn r to p-cos- purchase ape r,but cooerage,is asa/lable in participating com¢mu- and a of re be wed fix focd usJronce rotihp Ccnmet ps.roun:y fiocuipfa,r rcamyerfi r;feud rune d.ran..o nrties_ tEnf.ee used fo-compYc-e wit.,actor ftaodp7,, m—parrient r-Woncns ff Source:http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT/.Note:Area X now defined by FEMA as"Area of Minimal Flood Hazard" 17 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Maps printed by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the hawai`i County Civil Defense Agency indicate that areas makai of Akoni Pule highway should be evacuated during a tsunami warning (http:// 5. awaii.gov/tsunami/maps.as ). Large extents of hawai'i Island, including the project area, have been struck by highly destructive tsunami in historic times. The April 1, 1946 tsunami had a runup near Waiaka`ilio Pay of 12 feet(Atlas of Flawai`i, 3rd edition) (far below the 40-foot minimum elevation of all future home sites). As with much of the area—including the two large State properties to the north and many properties in Koala Manch—the property is subject to dam evacuation from Punawai Reservoir. This 10 million-gallon, earthen irrigation reservoir is 6.45 miles east, mauka of Kohala Mountain Road. Impacts and Mitigation Measures The area proposed for homes and improvements is outside the designated flood zone, and no flood zone impacts will occur. All house pads would be set back from the shoreline at a minimum elevation of about 40 feet above sea level (and generally above 50 feet), outside the VE flood zone. Per request from the hawai`i County Department of Public Works (see letter in Appendix= lb), the ant�licant would be amenable to encumbering the limits of gulches and the VE flood zone with drainage easements. This location also prevents exposure in the near and medium term, at least,to tsunami of the scale experienced in human history. The National Weather Service of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration operates the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and Alaska Tsunami Warning Center, which monitors sudden earth movements throughout the Pacific Basin. A tsunami from earth movements in South America would allow for as much as 15 hours warning time, and 4.5 hours for events in the Aleutian Islands, providing sufficient time for evacuation of island residents. Warning sirens are present in Kawaihae but are not readily audible at the property. The Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency recommends that residents in areas of the island where sirens are not audible sign up for mobile alerts. Sudden movement along faults close to hawai`i are unpredictable and would allow for a few minutes to perhaps an hour of warning time, and evacuation would be more problematic. The Hawaii County Civil Defense Agency will provide alerts in the event of a dam emergency at Punawai Reservoir, and their evacuation procedures would be followed. If the subdivision into six lots is ultimately approved, the hazard zone and appropriate evacuation procedures would be provided to all lot purchasers and an evacuation plan will be developed and included in the Project CCRs. Culverts or bridges will be constructed at locations where roadways cross gullies or gulches. As discussed previously,two of the five intermittent gulches have initially been detennined to be waters of the U.S. per Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Arany Corps of Engineers (ACOE). Project plans avoid any crossing one of these jurisdictional gulches, Keawewai Gulch. Any work that discharges and/or places fill within a jurisdictional water requires a Section 404 permit. During the design phase, project engineers will work with the ACOE to 18 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision confirm the permit requirements for each gulch; if a bridge is constructed on a jurisdictional water, it is likely that no Section 404 permit will be required. A culvert would require a permit. Concerning drainage, per the Hawaii County Code on Subdivision, Section 23-92. "Drainage, flood, and erosion mitigation measures a) The subdivider shall construct a storm water disposal system to contain runoff caused by the subdivision improvements within the boundaries of the subdivision, up to the expected one-hour, ten year storm event, as shown in plate 1 of the Department of public Works "Storm Drainage Standards", dated October 1970, or any approved revisions, unless those standards specify a greater recurrence interval, in which case, the greater interval shall be used. The amount of expected runoff shall be calculated according to the Department of Public Works "Storm Drainage Standards", dated October 1970, or any approved revisions thereto, or by any nationally-recognized method meeting with the approval of the director of public works. Runoff calculations shall include the effects of all required subdivision improvements, and lot improvements that may be allowed by existing zoning. (b) Storm water shall be disposed into drywells, infiltration basins, or other infiltration methods. The subdivision shall not alter the general drainage pattern above or below the subdivision. (c) Subdivider shall also comply with the requirements of chapter 27, Hawaii County Code. Chapter 27 and the County's Storm Drainage Standards require that all increases in runoff due to a project's development must be captured and disposed of. Rainfall runoff for a six-lot subdivision on the property was calculated by Belt Collins Hawaii (BCH) civil engineers using the Storm Drainage Standards. The total increase in rainfall runoff was calculated to be 6 cubic feet per second (cfs) based on the following calculations: Formula for Runoff Quantity, =ci ' ® Runoff Coefficient, c = 0.24 for pre-developed area S2, = 0.9 for hardscaped areas', = 0.29 weighted average for post-developed areas Rainfall Intensity, i = 3.1 inches4 Area, A= 37.88 acres i Q(existing)=28.2 cfs(0.24 x 3.1 x 37.88);Q(post-development)=33.7(0.29 x 3.1 x 37.88) Z Based on: low infiltration, hilly relief,good vegetal cover and agriculture development type 3 New hardscape comprised of: 117,000 sf of pavement and 24,000 sf of homesite hardscape. Per Hawaii County DPW comment letter in Appendix 1b,the design engineers will adjust the runoff coefficient of 0.95 for hardsWed areas in the drainage plan submitted to DPW, unless it is determined mutually through consultation with DPW that a different coefficient is approariate. 4 Using Plate 4; based on: i=1.5 inch per Plate 1, 10-year, 1-hour storm intensity and 10-minute time of concentration. If the subdivision is approved, drainage structures will be constructed to capture and retain the increase in rainfall runoff generated by the development. Drainage structures may include lava sumps, seepage drains, structures not requiring underground injection control permits, and/or drywells. A typical seepage drain structure has a percolation rate of 2 cfs, whereas a typical drywell structure has a percolation rate of 6 cfs. Given that the subdivision improvements (public parking and driveway pavements) and home sites will be constructed separately, it is conceivable that the 19 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision installed drainage structures will consist of two seepage drain/drywell for the subdivision improvements and six (one for each lot) seepage drains/drywells for the home sites. The above calculations assume a worst-case homesite hardscape of 24,000 square feet. CCRs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design Guidelines (Hawai`i CZM Program. 2006), which were part of the basis for Best Management practices specifically designed for the current site by landscape architect Leonard Eisel of B+K Design Group. These measures will act to reduce the quantity of hardscape, increase the infiltration capacity of the open areas on the lot, and reduce erosion and sedimentation. These measures, primarily designed to protect water quality, are detailed in Section 3.1.3, below. In this and other appropriate resource sections of the EA, relevant conditions that were imposed by the Hawaii County planning Commission and/or Hawaii County Council as part of S 379 and Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-102 have been identified and considered. Condition 9 of SMA 379 and Condition 7 of Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required a drainage study of the project site for review and approval by the Department of public Works, in conjunction with submittal of plans for subdivision review. A similar condition is expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit, Rezoning Ordinance and subdivision approval. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise There is a scientific consensus that the earth is warming due to manmade increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, according to the UN's Intergovernmental panel on Climate Change (LTH Manoa Sea Grant 2014). Global mean air temperatures are projected to increase by at least 2.717 by the end of the century. This will be accompanied by the warming of ocean waters, expected to be highest in tropical and subtropical seas of the Northern Hemisphere. Wet and dry season contrasts will increase, and wet tropical areas in particular are likely to experience more frequent and extreme precipitation. For Hawaii, where wanning air temperatures are already quite apparent, not only is the equable climate at risk but also agriculture, ecosystems,the visitor industry and public health. For subdivisions near the shoreline in leeward Hawaii, key considerations are the potential for increased runoff from storms, increased fire risk from droughts,higher wind loads from more frequent hurricanes, and most importantly,rising sea levels. No one can predict with any certainty how high sea levels will rise within 10 years, 20 years or 50 years. An overall global rise in sea level of 3.3 feet by the end of the 21 st century was proposed by Fletcher (2010) and others. A 2012 scientific assessments (e.g., Rahmstorf et a12012)posited 4 feet as a reasonable upper bound. Some recent research that concentrates on the potential for Antarctic melting to contribute more to sea level than generally modeled envisions as much as an additional 3.3 feet of sea level rise (DeConto and pollard 2016). Relative sea-level rise, of course, is a result of the combined water rise and land subsidence. The Big Island of Hawaii is sinking into the Earth's mantle because of the gravitational, isostatic load of its growing volcanoes. A subsidence rate of 0.08-0.12 inches/year related to isostatic sinking has been determined by submersible studies of drowned reefs off West Hawaii (Moore and Fornari 1984). 20 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision i_ Not only the magnitude of sea level rise but also the timing is the subject of debate. According to the Hawaii Timate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (HCCMAC) (2017:v): While the IPCC's "business as usual" scenario, where GHG emissions continue at the current rate of increase, predicts up to 3.2 feet of global sea level rise by year 2100 (IPCC 2014), recent observations and projections suggest that this magnitude of sea level rise could occur as early as year 2060 under more recently published highest-end scenarios... The HCCMAC report goes on to state that the Island of Hawaii is the least vulnerable of the main Hawaiian Islands to the impacts of sea level rise, but that certain areas—particularly Iona,Pak6, Kapoho and Hilo Bay"....face serious threats. It was estimated that at least 130 existing structures would experience chronic flooding if there were 3.2 feet of sea level rise." A sea level rise viewer from the Pacific Island Ocean Observing System hllps://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/slr-hawaii/)provides graphic representation of how regions will be affected by sea level rise (Figure 5b). As the slope in the area is relatively steep, and elevations rise to 10 feet or more above sea level with a few feet of the shoreline, sea level rise in itself will only inundate relatively small areas directly adjacent to the shoreline. This is unlike Waikiki, e.g., where a 10-foot rise in sea level would inundate large areas. However, aside from simple inundation, a rise in sea level also raises the level of attack for high -- waves and tsunami. As reported in the online Science Daily based on an article in the Nature journal, Scientific Reports (https://www.sciencedaily.co /releases/2018/09/180927164230.htm), a research team including LTH Manoa and DL determined that much sea level rise effects will be much more wide reaching. `By including models of dynamical physical processes such as erosion and wave run-up, a team of researchers has determined that land area in Hawaii vulnerable to future sea level rise may be double previous estimates." The proposed lots range in elevation from sea level to 160 feet above sea level. No home sites will be allowed makai of the ala loa/jeep road. In the portions of the lots mauka of the ala loa/jeep road, archaeological sites and buffers occupy the lower elevations, which are restricted to Lots 3 and 4 (see Figure 3). The combination of these factors constrains potential home sites to areas higher than 40 feet above sea level, and generally above 50 feet. As such, fixture homes site will have no exposure to areas subject to 3 to 10 or even 20 feet of sea level rise. To provide context, if sea level were to rise 20 feet, Kawaihae Harbor, all of Puako, Waikiki, and most of downtown Honolulu, Hilo and Lailua would be completely submerged. All fixture homes within the proposed subdivision would still be at least 20 feet above sea level. Climate change may also induce larger storms, with greater rainfall on an hourly, daily, seasonal or annual basis. This can lead to increased runoff and gulch flow. The property's steeply incised gulches itself will generally prevent gulch overflow except near the ocean, where no development is planned. Any culverts within the subdivision would be obligated by CC&Rs to be oversized to accommodate the 100-year storm, rather than the required 50-year storm, in order to account for 21 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision future potential increases in runoff. Larger storms may also lead to higher winds. To account for this, CCRs will also require that homes be built to withstand hurricane Category 2 force winds. Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that instead of more annual rainfall, climate change may also involve long droughts and even overall drier conditions, increasing wildfire risk. The precautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk discussed in Section 3.1.1 will mitigate additional potential risk. Ei ure 5b Sea Level Rise Ex osure Ma $ Zoom to... EXPOSURE Keawewai r.Sea Levet Rise Exposure Area fat.3llrft e r 0.5 F1' 1.1 Ft K 2.0 Ft 3.2 Ft BSII �' i1 r� «,rt, a , VULNERAMHTY PropertyD Potential Economic Loss,,", r.Flooded Highways r, OTHER VEMAYS r+,t7crrteJ e,0117irss m clew - hick aG'T' f( r� i 30�0 a� F �f� �� °� Nad00 r!Za2ri2�F � s Y / / aFi dvt�a,lu 16f.tt1- Te�i�^ot Use Re tomap-mr 3.1.3 Water Quality Water quality in the nearshore waters of leeward North Kohala is determined by inputs from both overland flow into nearshore surface waters and groundwater flowing out to sea. Background information concerning these two sources are discussed separately below, followed by a discussion of impacts to surface waters and groundwater. Surface Waters In this part of North Kohala, overland water flows primarily in the steep,parallel gulches described in Section 3.1.2 during infrequent heavy rainfall episodes. Even under natural conditions there is a high erosion rate on the steep, dry slopes. Although recent efforts by area landowners have substantially mitigated the problem, flows have historically been muddy and turgid, full of sediment 22 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision derived from overland sheet and rill flow across partly vegetated areas denuded by former and current cattle grazing, exacerbated by frequent fire and goat grazing. This type of flow delivers sediment that in large quantities can be very harmful and even destroy coral communities. Almost all of the sediment in the gulches is derived from sheet flow and gully erosion from locations mauka and outside the property, where the vast majority of the drainage basin for each gulch is contained. For example, Keawewai Gulch, the largest gulch on the property, drains the northern part of the property and empties into the ocean just south of the Waiaka`ilio Bay(Fig. 6). According to the Division of Aquatic Resources (DAR), the watershed's area is 6 square miles, with a maximum elevation of 4,701 feet; land use in the basin is grassland, shrub/scrub and bare land. ( ttp://hawaiiwatersedatlas.com/watershes/hawaii/85022.pdf). As illustrated in the Google Earth © aerial images in Figure 7, heavy rainfall events transport sediment derived from upland areas and deposit it in the shoreline area. Only 3 percent of the drainage basin, which represents the source of the sediment in the gulch, is within the Kohala Shoreline property. Some degree of sediment input to coastal waters is natural—the gulches that pass through the property were carved out over geologic time by flood events that inexorably carry sediment laden water. Although the marine environment may be adapted to long-term periodic stress from sedimentation events, clearly such adaptation has its limits. Excessive sedimentation is a problem in some locations, and development must not ignore the potential for increased sedimentation. In the big picture in North Kohala, however, the main culprit responsible for excessive sedimentation is overgrazing by cattle and feral ungulates on typically dry lands. When combined with the twin and interrelated scourges of wildfire and fire-adapted alien grasses, sediment discharge to the ocean following periodic severe rainfall events can be substantial. Groundwater In the Hawaiian Islands in general,precipitation that is not cycled into evapotranspiration or conducted through streams into the ocean percolates into the ground to collect in the aquifers under the island before slowly making its way to the sea. Water may be trapped between vertical confining layers such as dikes or perched above horizontal confining layers such as volcanic ash soil, forming high level aquifers. If water continues to diffuse through the layers of rock, sand, soil and gravel, it will reach sea level. Fresh water has a lower density than seawater and floats above the saltwater- permeated rock in a body shaped much like a lens, most of which exists below sea level. Due to the difference in densities, for every foot the lens extends above sea level it extends 40 feet below sea level, although the lower areas contain a zone of mixing. Basal water tables have inland gradients that can rise as much as four feet per mile in high rainfall areas. This freshwater-permeated rock is the source of most of the State's groundwater. A basal aquifer underlies the dry coastal areas of North Kohala and is the source of fresh water here as well. This thin, brackish to saline lens overlies saltwater at depth and is in hydraulic contact with seawater at the shoreline. Excessive withdrawals from groundwater can change salinity levels in estuaries, anchialine ponds, and wetlands; excessive nutrients in groundwater derived from infiltration of wastewater and fertilizer can also be a concern. The adverse effects of nutrients are of somewhat less concern for the deep, wave-affected coastlines of leeward North Kohala, where brackish waters emerging from the basal lens mix almost instantly with the background ocean waters, but the concern remains. 23 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Figure 6 eawewai Gulch Drainage assn � y r;-G (r 1JNlrr p rmrf' ir(Iw. ,�y�.'. hf�d„';lu,'/I' � !% lVJ✓rfl'i"'r...y �y; ^���, "n � r ✓,, r �' r ��r r ; ,r,� r"7 �,' � �;,�rr„rani,;; r(l�ir;✓d ✓ 1r01;��,y!�/�r�i ism l�j�i n<�';�' ; ��� Ur�J�f�%rrl�ii�A%rI f�l�i�'lr%',, ,o, ,r �l� ✓r //yy �� fir,� ,,(/ ..y� , �� � �u(��r F , / r .,� � y/al ,,iir6✓ /r �(ar✓""�'j� I /m,�( 'h';.� /� „'!fur �a�rr!/r�/�i/�//�/��,.. „n,.,, „�/�„ 'rt'`rir, r✓/ln,,,,.A„�/ �� n%i!r'�r''v ✓Il G os,. /�� �� A�ry. � �' �” /:�(r r✓�( rc.-,rr �rl a J;n 'i'� ��/ro" I�r�/�a�” efilp.",�'i..prl i �f �"�,I �w rY'd0�>'r ,1(.,./✓na'r i,na "i- � J(�„ r. ��/,r�/l 7�/ r� 4 / rr �r11roe� 0 6w yro �r��ii��' 'i ✓ rl�rr/ r;�j�,fi� %��/�', "/ Alar i �✓ir� 1;P � r��r,n s � �n�°"�'ru rll �^ r ry V1�r<r�i'.' ri iJl���jl��a j�flir, �rJ/r� �r�r (I %� I r � (fir/ >✓F� dJ.l "� ��n� � r,�'„f,rn rr�� r�'�r rr ��1� ���/r�/�� �t"✓� 1,J�� ileirr% �" �1wi F I� r � ri ,u%�` iV ror�w r Ir�i".. 1 ��! d ) o--✓ i�r�,�r �,J�r r((� / : ,r ,w� ?r�I`" li I� joN�;,. '� �� Nm rrr""r�n�r( I /,,, �/I ���fy� "�� �/ �j (rm'91�r 1l ''/�r'/�%N �r,'r�"�✓m r/,,; "y`.I !^u /rr � '"r"� 2'e^�'��i/��? �J ! r ref/r/�� ���� f i r�,� e ��1r ml ( n"n, d!)`" n^ ;, ✓ii,'( V1�" '" �I(�lY /y,�j eY r kv, rd ' ' J ✓ !'rc` r�✓in�a'. 1; ��,/ r)�>'�/�'� r✓�k�?,ii % f ioJ� ID�; �'�` �" " � 1' �„ � e�S.wm�' r' rn m�r,;r"^n,,,mma /�✓i;. f F✓� r >' J "" / rl ✓' l/ / r l f/C' /✓ `OM1aI ai r r ✓ r age Basi r , {' ✓ � �"m"rw�� u i m� a r r m rc f ✓ N"W" �' � �i �^ ✓"r, rd ww* n nr' rnw�"%"?M r f( ' f' Kph3h � � � ✓r,bpi p��,� .� ,„A7�ds �Y r� � f -9. '. Shoreline Property ,,rm ' , , `( Q 05 13 S Figure 7. Sedimentation into Ocean after Rain Event from Gulches on Kohala Mountain fm ,r rr, y a i r, 24 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Investigations by hydrologist Tom Nance Water Resource Engineering for the current project contained in Appendix 7 and by marine biologist Steve Dollar for a previous project(Marine Research Consultants [MRC] 2010) evaluated in depth the hydrological factors, water chemistry dynamics and marine habitat of the area. This was supplemented by unpublished research by MRC in October 2015. MRC9s maps, data and photographs are included as Appendix 6. A summary of these surveys and analysis is presented in this section, which deals with water quality, and in Section 3.1.4 in the context of biology. On a day to day basis, the primary factor that distinguishes the nearshore marine waters from deeper ocean waters is the steady input of groundwater through percolation from the basal lens. The way to establish the chemistry of the groundwater, especially as it affects marine organisms, is to sample both wells and nearshore marine waters. Samples were taken in 2010 from two high level wells located mauka of the property, and three marine transect survey sites were established in the vicinity of the Kohala Shoreline property(Figure S). Water quality parameters evaluated included the ten specific criteria designated for open coastal waters in Chapter 11-54, Section 06 (d)(Area- Specific criteria for the Dona(west)coast of Island of Idawai`i). ®pen Coastal waters) of the State of Hawaii Department of Health(DOH)Water Quality Standards. These criteria include total dissolved nitrogen(TDN), nitrate+nitrite nitrogen (N03-+N02-, hereafter referred to as N03-), ammonium nitrogen (NH4'), total dissolved phosphorus (TDP), orthophosphate phosphorus (P04 3), Chlorophyll a(Ch1 a), turbidity, temperature, pH and salinity. In addition, silica(Si)was also reported because this parameter is a sensitive indicator of biological activity and the degree of groundwater mixing. Groundwater sampling excluded chlorophyll and turbidity. The well sample results (Table 2)reflect the baseline water chemistry of the water prior to leaking into the nearshore waters, where it mixes with seawater, with some constituents taken up in biological processes. These samples assisted in analysis of the water chemistry of the nearshore waters. Table 20 Lab Results of Well Water Che istry Samples Sample Location Nos NH4 DON TN PO4 I)0P TP Silica Salinity (PM) (PM) 11tm) 4tm) 4LM) Pm) (PM) (PM) (PPT) Well 6549-01 70.4 1.05 12.0 83.5 3.30 0.15 3.45 875 0.228 Well 6451-03 92.1 1.30 1.75 1.50 95.1 0.65 2.15 962 1.712 Source: TN 2015 Notes: 1. Samples collected on December 17,2009 by Tom Nance. 2. Laboratory analyses by Marine Analytical Specialists (EPA Labcode: I-II 00009). 3. Results presented in micro-molar(µM)units can be converted to milligrams per liter by multiplying by the atomic weight and dividing by 1000. For the marine transects, Site 1 was located off the northern portion of the property in Waiaka`ilio Bay; Site 2 was located off the southern portion of the property, and Site 3 was located in a small embayment approximately 2,000 feet south of the southern property boundary. As Site 3 is well removed from the property, it served as both as a comparison site to evaluate any unique characteristics at the property and as a control site for any future monitoring that may be required for 25 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision implementation of the project. All three survey sites were sampled in December 2009 and March 2015 in identical manners. F ure 8® Water Qualit ample Sites 4 � 54 ...�y� d,n M iiu 4 tis mD � _ � 'pr. 1000 feet Water quality was evaluated on marine transects that were oriented perpendicular to the shoreline and depth contours. Water samples were collected at ten locations on each transect from just seaward of the shoreline to approximately 200 meters (m) offshore(0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10, 5 0,100 and 200 m). The sampling scheme was designed to span the greatest range of salinity with respect to potential freshwater efflux at the shoreline. Sampling was more concentrated in the nearshore zone because this area receives the majority of groundwater discharge, and hence is most important with respect to identifying the effects of shoreline modification. ®wing to the shallow depth of the nearshore shelf, at stations from the shoreline extending to 4 m from shore, a single sample was collected within 20 centimeters (cm) of the sea surface by swimmers working from shore. At stations 5 to 200 m from the shoreline, samples were collected at two depths; a surface sample was collected within approximately 20 cm of the sea surface, and a bottom sample was collected within 1 m of the sea floor. Surface water samples were collected by filling pre-rinsed, 1-liter polyethylene bottles. Deep water samples were collected using a Niskin-type oceanographic sampling bottle. The bottle is lowered to the desired sampling depth(approximately 1-2 m off the bottom)with spring-loaded endcaps held open so water can pass freely through the bottle. At the desired sampling depth, a weighted messenger released from the surface triggers closure of the endcaps, isolating a volume of water, 26 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Subsamples for nutrient analyses were immediately placed in 125-milliliter(ml) acid-washed,triple rinsed,polyethylene bottles and stored on ice. Analyses for Si,NH4',PO4-3,and NO3-were performed on filtered subsamples with a Technicon Autoanalyzer using standard methods for seawater analysis (Strickland and Parsons 1968, Grasshoff 1983). TDN and TDP were analyzed in a similar fashion following digestion. Dissolved organic nitrogen(DON) and dissolved organic phosphorus (DOP)were calculated as the difference between TDN and dissolved inorganic N, and TDP and dissolved inorganic P,respectively. Water for other analyses was subsampled from 1-liter polyethylene bottles and kept chilled until analysis. Chl a was measured by filtering 300 ml of water through glass-fiber filters;pigments on filters were extracted in 90% acetone in the dark at-20o C for 12-24 hours. Fluorescence before and after acidification of the extract was measured with a Turner Designs fluorometer. Salinity was r-) determined using an AGE Model 2 100 laboratory salinometer with a readability of 0.000 11 parts per thousand(ppt). Turbidity was determined using a 90-degree nephelometer and reported in nephelometric turbidity units (NTU) (precision of 0.01 NTU). Vertical profiles of salinity, Fjitemperature and depth were acquired using an RBR-620 CTD calibrated to factory standards. All fieldwork for both surveys was conducted by Dr. Steven Dollar. All laboratory analyses were conducted by Marine Analytical Specialists in Honolulu,HI(Labcode: HI 00009). This analytical laboratory possesses acceptable ratings from EPA-compliant proficiency and quality control testing. Within Appendix 6, Tables 1 and 2 of show results of all water chemistry analyses for samples collected off the property in March 18,2015,while Tables 3 and 4 show similar results for December 2009. Table I shows concentrations of dissolved nutrients in micromolar(PAI)units; Table 2 shows concentrations in micrograms per liter(Rg/L). Concentrations of eight dissolved nutrient constituents in surface and deep samples are plotted as functions of distance from the shoreline in Figures 2 (2015) and 3 (2009). Values of salinity,turbidity, Ch1 a and turbidity as functions of distance from shore are shown in Figures 4 (2015)and 5 (2009). Several patterns of distribution are evident in Tables 1-4 and Figures 2-5 of Appendix 6. It can be seen in Figures 2 and 3 that at all three transects,the dissolved nutrients Si NO3-and TN display U distinctly elevated concentrations in the samples collected within about 5 in from the shoreline at F� transect sites 2 and 3. The peak values at the shoreline were at the shoreline at Transect 1 in 2015, LH although no such distinct nearshore peak is evident for these nutrients at transect site I in 2009. Salinity displays the opposite trend,with sharply lower concentrations in the nearshore samples at all sites in 2015, and at sites 2 and 3 in 2009 (Appendix 6, Figures 4 and 5). Lill" These patterns are a result of concentrated input of groundwater to the ocean near the shoreline. F'! Low salinity groundwater,which typically contains high concentrations of Si and NO3-,percolates to the ocean at the shoreline,resulting in a nearshore zone of mixing. In many areas of the Hawaiian Islands, such groundwater percolation results in steep horizontal gradients of increasing salinity and decreasing nutrients moving seaward. PO4 3_ is also generally elevated in groundwater relative to ocean water. However, during both sampling years,the patterns of horizontal gradients of concentrations Of PO4 3- do not show the same uniformly progressive decreases with distance from shore as Si and NO3-. Horizontal gradients of TN and TP reflect the patterns of NO3- and PO43_ 27 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision r L n respectively. Horizontal gradients of NH4+were evident close to the shoreline during both years of sampling,but much less pronounced than for inorganic nutrients. At the open coastal sampling locales off the property,the zone of mixing is small, extending only several meters from shore. These gradients are far less pronounced than at other areas of West Hawaii where either semi-enclosed embayments occur or mixing processes are less vigorous. Water chemistry parameters that are not associated with groundwater input(TON, TOP) do not J show a sharp gradient of decreasing concentration with respect to distance from the shoreline. Rather, these constituents show no consistent pattern across thehorizontal ranges of the sampling n area. Similar to the patterns of dissolved inorganic nutrients (Si and NO3-),the distribution of Chl a and turbidity also display peaks near the shoreline,with rapidly diminishing values seaward of the shoreline(Tables 1-4,Figures 4 and 5 of Appendix 6). Beyond 10 m from the shoreline, the concentration of Ch1 a in surface waters is essentially constant across the sampling scheme at values below 0.2 gg/L in 2015 (Figure 4) and 0.1 gg/L in 2009 (Figure 5). Turbidity displays the same trend with peak values near the shoreline and rapidly diminishing values beyond about 10 m from the shoreline which extend across the remainder of the sampling regime(Figures 4 and 5). It can be seen in Tables 1-4 of Appendix 6 that chemical concentrations at the most seaward sampling stations (200 m from shore) at all three sites are similar and represent open coastal ocean I J waters with little influence from land. A useful treatment of water chemistry data for interpreting the extent of material input from land is 0 application of a hydrographic mixing model. In the simplest form, such a model consists of plotting the concentration of a dissolved chemical species as a function of salinity. The concept of using such mixing models which scale nutrient concentrations to salinity is utilized by the Hawaii State DOH for establishing a unique set of water quality standards for the West Coast of the Island of Hawaii [Hawai'i Administrative Rules Chapter 11-54-06 (d)]. As the northern limit of these regulations is Malae Point in North Kohala,the shoreline area containing the Kohala Shoreline property is included in the West Hawaii criteria. Figures 6 and 7 of Appendix 6 show plots of the concentrations of Si,NO3-,PO4 3_, and NH4+as functions of salinity for the samples collected at each transect site off the Kohala Shoreline property in 2015 and 2009,respectively. Each graph also shows two conservative mixing lines constructed by connecting the endmember concentrations of open ocean water and groundwater from two high level potable wells located upslope of the property(TNWRE 2010). Comparison of the curves produced by the distribution of data with conservative mixing lines provides an indication of the origin and fate of the material in question. If the parameter in question displays purely conservative behavior(i.e.,no input or removal from any process other than physical mixing), data points should fall on, or near,the conservative mixing line. If,however, external material is added to the system through processes such as leaching of fertilizer nutrients to 28 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision 4� i i_ l groundwater, data points will fall above the mixing line. If material is being removed from the system by processes such as biological uptake, data points will fall below the mixing line. Dissolved Si represents a check on the method, as this material is present in high concentrations in FU groundwater, low concentration in open coastal waters, and is not a major component of fertilizer or sewage effluent. In addition, Si is not utilized rapidly within the nearshore environment by biological processes. It can be seen in Figures 6 and 7 of Appendix 6 that all data points for all three U transect sites fall in a linear array on the conservative mixing line created with end-point concentrations from the two wells. In 2014, data points for Transect 1 fell close to the mixing line for Well 645-1-03,while data points for Transect 3 lie closer to the mixing line for Well 6451-03. Data points for Transect 2 fall slightly below both mixing lines. In 2009, data points for Transect 2 fall on the mixing.,line for Well 6451-03. While there are slight variations between transects, and between sampling years, the straight lines prescribed by the data points lying close to the mixing lines support the contention that Si is behaving as a conservative tracer and that well water sampled from the upslope wells is similar in composition to groundwater entering the ocean off the Kohala Shoreline property. The plots of NO3-versus salinity show a somewhat dissimilar distribution to that of Si. While data points for Transects 1 and 2 fall near the mixing line, data points for Transect 3 deviate in a linear array above the mixing line. These patterns indicate that on Transect 3 there is a subsidy of NO3"in the nearshore ocean relative to what would be predicted from mixing of natural groundwater and open coastal water. Such subsidies may result from either different composition of groundwater entering the ocean at the shoreline than in upslope wells, or from groundwater nutrient subsidies r from developments upgradient of the Kohala Shoreline property(i.e.,Kohala Ranch and Kohala VEstates). Concentrations of NO3- on Transect 2 were substantially higher in 2009 compared to 2015. While PO43-is also generally found in groundwater in higher concentrations than open coastal water, it occurs in far lower concentrations compared to NO3-, owing in part to a high absorptive affinity of phosphorus in soils or rock. It can be seen in Figures 6 and 7 of Appendix 6 that when plotted as functions of salinity, concentrations of PO43- do not prescribe linear patterns similar to Si �J and NO3-- Some of the highest values are at the highest salinities,while some of the lowest values r� are at the lower salinities. u Plots of concentrations of NH4+versus salinity show similar relationship as PO4 3. Plots of concentrations of NH4+versus salinity exhibit no linear trends with respect to salinity(Figures 6 and 7). As with PO43 some of the highest values of NH4+occurred at the highest salinities, suggesting that the source of most of the NH4+in the nearshore ocean is not from the land but rather from biological processes occurring in the ocean. U The West Coast of the Island of Hawaii has area-specific water quality standards [Chapter §11-54-6(d)]. The major difference between these specific criteria and the general criteria for open coastal waters for the rest of the state is the consideration that high nutrient groundwater mixes with oceanic water within the nearshore zone. As a result, area-specific criteria for nutrients that occur in high concentrations in groundwater relative to ocean water(NO3-, TDN,PO4+, and TDP) are. 29 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U evaluated by two criteria based on salinity. In areas where nearshore marine water salinity is greater than 32%0, specific criteria for geometric means apply. Geometric means are calculated at each sampling station from three values collected on three sampling dates, spaced within a 14-day period. For samples with salinity below 32%0, compliance with the DOH criteria is defined by the slope of the regression line of the nutrient concentration as a function of salinity. Slopes greater than the"not to exceed"values stated in the standards are deemed out of compliance. (Note that for the present assessment,three separate samplings within a 14-day period were not conducted). In Appendix 6, it can be seen in Tables 1-4 that in 2015 only a single sample at the shoreline of Transect 1 had salinity less than 32%o,while in 2009 Transect 2 was the only sampling location with at least one sample with salinity.less than 32%0. Hence, it can be interpreted that the relevant P DOH compliance criteria are the regression statistics shown in §I 1-54-6(d)(1)(ii). Table 5 shows the slopes and upper and lower 95%confidence limits of linear regressions of NO3-, TDN,PO43_ and TDP as functions of salinity from each of the three ocean transects. Also shown in Table 5 are Pi the"compliance slopes"listed in the West Hawaii area-specific water quality standards. As stated in the WQS, "...the absolute value of the upper 95%confidence limit for the calculated sample regression coefficient(i.e., slope) shall not exceed the absolute value listed in the regulations." When linear regression analyses are performed with data in units of gg/L,the absolute values of confidence limits of the slope of the regression line of NO3-versus salinity exceeded the absolute values of the specific criteria slope(-31.92)on Transects 2 and 3 in 2009 and Transect 1 in 2015. The upper confidence limit of TDN on Transect 2 in 2009 and Transect 1 in 2015 also exceeded the specific criteria slope(Table 5). The area-specific DOH standards for West Hawaii also include three parameters (NH4+, Ch1 a and turbidity)that are not subject to the conditions of salinity based on the 32%o boundary.Rather,the specific geometric mean criteria apply to all values of these parameters regardless of salinity. As shown in Appendix 6, Tables 2 and 4,there are many values of NH4+on all three transects within 50 in of the shoreline exceed the geometric mean standard. Similarly, most of the values of turbidity exceed standards. As stated above,with little or no development presently on the Kohala Shoreline property,the offshore conditions may represent essentially the natural setting of the area, although there are legitimate differences of opinion regarding this. The DLNR Division of Aquatic Resources has stated that the turbidity goes beyond that which should be expected as a result of natural surface erosion in these nearshore waters, and that furthermore there are clear effects on the aquatic biota, particularly coral cover. Conversely, as conjectured by MRC, it is possible that the geometric mean values that are presently DOH compliance criteria do not fully consider the natural setting of at least some nearshore areas subject to ephemeral stream flow in West Hawaii. This subject is discussed more fully in Section 3.1.4 in the context of aquatic biota. Impacts and Mitigation Measures: General Considerations Given the two input water sources to the nearshore environment—runoff channeled into gulches and groundwater emerging through the basal lens—it is important to eliminate or reduce pollution from both gulches and groundwater, and to evaluate the effect of changes in water quality and quantity when they do occur. When land in a dry, scrubby, sloped area is developed with homes,there are changes in the input dynamics. Sediment input can increase temporarily during construction, if 30 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision C7' 7 mitigation is absent or ineffective. Excess sediment input can also occur during occupation of the homes as well, although some landscape and development practices can actually reduce the amount runoff and erosion and thus the sediment transported in gulches. Separately,nutrients from fertilizers,pesticides and other contaminants can infiltrate the soil column and pass through rock into I the groundwater. If transported in excessive amounts that exceed the capacity of the soil and rock to remediate them, these contaminants can affect groundwater. n i Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Surface Waters Construction has the potential to produce uncontrolled excess sediment from soil erosion during and after clearing and excavation that may impact natural watercourses, water quality and flooding. Contaminants associated with heavy equipment and other sources during construction can impact �? surface water and groundwater if not mitigated effectively. In this discussion,mitigation that will be �u required-either by law, regulation or CC&R codicils that are expected to be mandated when permit approvals are granted—is presented first,to set the stage for the evaluation of impacts. n In order to minimize the potential for sedimentation and erosion of shoreline areas,the contractor shall perform all earthwork and grading in conformance with Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment i l Control,Hawaii County Code. Grading permits are expected to be required for development of infrastructure (roadways and parking areas), and grading plans will be developed by an engineer and submitted to the County Department of Public Works. Furthermore,because infrastructure development for the project will disturb more than one acre, a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System(NPDES)permit will likely be needed before the project infrastructure construction commences. This permit requires the completion of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan(SWPPP). In order to properly manage storm water runoff,the SWPPP will describe the emplacement of a number of best management practices (BMPs)for the �i project. These BMPs may include,but will not be limited to,the following: U • Minimization of soil loss and erosion by revegetation and stabilization of slopes and disturbed areas of soil,possibly using hydromulch, geotextiles, or binding substances, as soon as possible after working; • Minimization of sediment loss by emplacement of structural controls possibly including silt fences, gravel bags, sediment ponds, check dams,and other barriers,in order to retard and Li prevent the loss of sediment from the site; _} • Minimizing disturbance of soil during periods of heavy rain; j • Phasing of large projects in order to disturb a minimum necessary area of soil at a particular time; • Application of protective covers to soil and material stockpiles; • Construction and use of a stabilized construction vehicle entrance; • Use of drip pans beneath vehicles not in use in order to trap vehicle fluids; • Routine maintenance of BMPs by adequately trained personnel; and • Cleanup of significant leaks or spills and disposal at an approved site, if they occur. + 31 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U At the points in time when individual lot owners build their homes,there may be additional land clearing that involves areas of an acre or less, which may or may not be subject to NPDES or grading permits. In order to ensure proper mitigation for potential sedimentation, the project will adopt relevant protocols for grading of the lots, similar to those in the Recommended Construction Best Management Practices (BWs)for Land Disturbance of Less Than One Acre that was approved by Board of Directors of the Kohala Ranch Community Association, on August 9, 2007. Specifically,the following are proposed as both CC&Rs applicable to all lots in the project and as conditions of approval of the SMA Use Permit: (a)Construction Management Techniques (1)Limit clearing and grubbing to the minimum necessary for grading and equipment operation. (2) Sequence construction to minimize the exposure time of the cleared surface area (3) Stage or phase construction for large projects. Stabilize the land surface in one phase before land disturbing activities are initiated in another phase. Stabilization must be accomplished by temporarily or permanently protecting the disturbed soil surface from rainfall impacts and runoff. (4)Erosion and sediment control measures must be in place and functional before earth moving operations begin. These measures shall be properly constructed and maintained throughout the construction period. (5)All control measures must be checked and repaired as necessary, for example,weekly in dry periods and within twenty-four hours after any rainfall of 0.5 inches or greater within a 24-hour period. During prolonged rainfall, daily checking may be necessary. Maintain records of checks and repairs. (6)Maintain records of the duration and estimated volume of storm water discharge(s). (7)A specific individual shall be designated to be responsible for erosion and sediment controls on each project site. (b)Vegetation Controls (1)Pre-construction vegetative ground cover shall not be destroyed,removed, or disturbed more than twenty calendar days prior to land disturbance. (2)Temporary soil stabilization with appropriate vegetation must be applied on areas that will remain unfinished for more than thirty calendar days. (3)Permanent soil-stabilization with perennial vegetation or pavement shall be applied as soon as practical after: final grading. Irrigation and maintenance of the perennial vegetation must be provided for thirty calendar days or until the vegetation takes root, whichever is shorter. (c) Structural Controls (1) Storm water flowing toward the construction area must be diverted by using appropriate control measures, as practical. (2)Erosion control measures shall be designed according to the size of disturbed or drainage areas to detain runoff and trap sediment. (3)Water must be discharged in a manner that the discharge shall not cause or contribute to a violation of State of Hawaii Water Quality Standards. 32 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision IIS t_I t — The project engineer will also explore the use of"mini-sediment basins", as successfully implemented in the Kohala Estates subdivision. Rather than excavating one or two large basins, these involve multiple areas that enhance existing topographic basins near intermittent gulches to capture small amounts of runoff that cumulatively offer significant percolation. These professionally engineered but low-key basins are lower in cost and involve less disruption to scenery and vegetation(Susan Fischer,pers. comm.). In addition to the above requirements related to grading permits,NPDES permits and locally derived BMPs, CC&Rs will require adherence to a set of measures based on Low Impact Design (LID) Guidelines (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006). While not all design guidelines are appropriate to any given site, one principle-that connects all LID practices is sustainability. ( "LII?is defined as a more sustainable land development pattern than the conventional U method currently used in most areas. It incorporates a suite of landscaping and design techniques known as "Better Site Design"that attempt to maintain the natural,pre- development hydrology of a site and the surrounding watershed. An important LID principle is the idea that stormwater is not merely a waste product to be disposed of, but rather that rainwater is a resource. LID also integrates a range of structural best management practices (BMPs)for road design and stormwater and wastewater management systems that minimize environmental impacts (Hawai`i CZM Program 2006: 1-2). These guidelines seek to prevent environmental impacts rather than compensate for them; minimize the use of regional conveyance systems;preserve natural areas;reduce impact on watershed hydrology;utilize less complex,non-structural methods to lower cost and maintenance; and create a umultifunctional landscape. LID Guidelines were part of the basis for Best Management Practices specifically designed for the current site by landscape architect Leonard Bisel of B+K Design Group. The measures are consistent with the U.S. Green Building Council(USGBC)requirements and strategies needed to �.i obtain Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED) certification. They are also consistent with requirements and strategies needed to obtain certification in the Sustainable Sites Initiative(SITES)program,which was developed, in part,by the American Society of Landscape Architects. These measures will act to reduce the quantity of hardscape, increase the infiltration capacity of the open areas on the lot, and reduce erosion and sedimentation. For the current project, the following guidelines will be incorporated in project design as requirements of the CC&Rs. These measures are described and illustrated in detail in Appendix 5 and summarized below. DESIGN CONCEPT#1 - Limit site disturbance: This design measure has a simple and straightforward rationale:the less area that is disturbed during the development and construction of new home sites,the less potential there will be for increased erosion and sediment loss. The following will be required to be undertaken to ensure limited site disturbance: `—' 33 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision 1. Clearing and grading of the site will be done in such a way that existing, mature vegetation - above and/or below an excavated area is preserved. Vegetated buffers above construction sites aid in the prevention of high-volume sheet flow across cut/fill areas. Vegetated buffers below construction sites help to filter and trap sediment before it can travel to existing waterways. 2. To ensure that significant natural characteristics such as landforms,vegetation, scenic qualities and open space are preserved, a significant portion of each lot will be reserved as "Natural Area."No development will be allowed within the Natural Areas. Prior to planning of the homes and hardscape on each lot,naturally vegetated buffers 10 feet in width on both sides of gulches will be delineated and preserved in a lot landscape plan to be filed in accordance with CC&Rs. 3. As each lot is developed,the homeowner and architect will work with the homeowners' association to identify a proposed Building Envelope. All site improvements will fall within the limits of the proposed Building Envelope. Site improvements include,but are not limited to,built structures,private outdoor spaces, grading, drainage, fencing, and retaining walls. Additionally, certain site improvements, such as utility connections,may fall outside of the Building Envelope. Building Envelopes should comply with all setback criteria and respond to natural features, such as topography and vegetation. Once the Building Envelope has been established,the remainder of the Suggested Building Site Location will become Natural Area.- For areas within the Building Envelope,the following design concepts will be implemented: DESIGN CONCEPT#2 -Take a less engineered approach to sitegrading: Minimizing the amount of disturbed area is an important consideration in terms of reducing erosion. The unique physical characteristics of a site are also important and should be acknowledged and expressed in the site design and grading. Grading methods that strike a balance between the two and are not entirely focused on the efficiency of space are preferred. The following will be required to be considered in the development of each parcel: 1. The grading plan that will be developed by a Civil Engineer in consultation with a U Landscape Architect must keep aesthetics in mind and focus on the sense of place. All cut and fill slopes,retaining walls and other site features must be designed to blend into, and LI reflect the natural characteristic of the site and the surrounding area. Avoid grading that has static, engineered slopes that look unnatural and do not blend in with the surrounding topography. Encourage grading that has natural,undulating slopes that mimic the adjacent landforms and incorporates its natural features. 2. Foundations and exterior spaces should step down with, or be set into,the natural --- topography wherever practical. 3. Site grading must be adjusted to retain existing vegetation and trees,wherever possible. U 34 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision DESIGN CONCEPT#3 -Maximize percolation/Minimize runoff: Impervious surfaces such as roofs, driveway and parking areas,patios,pool decks and walkways reduce the absorption of rainwater into the ground and increase surface runoff. The following will be considered in the development of each parcel to maximize percolation and minimize runoff. 1. Impervious surfaces will be reduced to the smallest area possible. All other areas will be maintained as landscaped area and covered with planting,porous stone ground cover or mulch. Wherever possible, all existing vegetated areas will be retained. 2. Utilize porous materials for driveways,parking areas, and outdoor spaces where possible. Rainwater from non-porous or semi-porous surfaces swill be directed onto landscaped areas. Roof runoff will be captured in gutters and either directed to a cistern and stored for irrigation or directed to a landscaped area with the potential to absorb up to two inches of roof runoff,reducing the volume of site runoff even in moderately large storms. 3. Existing vegetated areas and proposed landscaped areas will reduce the velocity of storm water runoff and prevent erosion. Landscaped areas allow runoff to percolate into the soil, which promotes groundwater recharge, filters sediment and other pollutants, and helps to prevent flooding. 4. Install grassed swales or drainage trenches, as needed,to direct and transmit excess surface flow to detention basins to collect and slow down runoff from impervious surfaces. 5. Proper design and monitoring of landscape irrigation are important considerations in Li controlling erosion and sedimentation. The following will be considered in the development of each parcel when designing and maintaining an irrigation system, as well as common area irrigation): a) Utilize low-flow/low application rate irrigation heads and drip irrigation that will not apply water faster than it can be absorbed by the soil. F1b) Separate irrigation valves/zones by plant type(combine plants with similar watering Li requirements),microclimate(i.e. sunny areas vs. shady areas), and physical site differences(i.e. slope areas vs. flat areas). c) Install a flow sensor which will shut off the irrigation system in the event of a sudden Li pressure loss due to a broken head,ruptured mainline or lateral line, or defective valve. I L DESIGN CONCEPT#4—Alternative =roaches to slope retention/stabilization: To the extent possible, site disturbance/grading will be limited in order to minimize erosion and sediment loss. Proposed development will be designed to fit the natural contours,where possible. The use of retaining walls and graded slopes may be required in order to build on hilly terrain. Retaining walls can be effective in controlling erosion because they break-up and slow down the rate of surface flow on a slope. Where retaining walls and graded slopes are utilized, the following must be considered as alternate approaches to slope retention and stabilization in a plan designed by an Architect/Engineer in consultation with a Landscape Architect: 1. Retaining walls will be designed to blend in with the adjacent topography. Curved, organic forms are encouraged rather than straight lines. Where possible,utilize stone that is native to 35 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L the area to construct the walls. Break up long lengths of retaining walls with materials such as boulders and portions of dry-stacked boulder walls or consider allowing portions of the existing slope to extend through the wall. Introduce plantings at the top and bottom of walls to create a softer look. Where terraced wails are utilized, incorporate planting between the terraces. 2. Existing vegetation will be required to be retained wherever possible. When existing trees will be saved,the ground surface and flow of water will not be altered within an area that �1 extends out 1-1/2 times the diameter of the drip line of the tree.Appropriate walls should be constructed to maintain existing grades. 3. All exposed slopes should be stabilized to prevent erosion and sedimentation. The following are options to consider instead of(or in addition to)planting; geotextile mats, erosion _J control blankets,temporary/permanent seeding,reinforced mats,bonded fiber matrices, and stone blankets. 4. Where possible,keep drainage as a natural, sheet surface flow. Runoff will be directed into grassed or vegetated swales, detention basins, landscaped areas, storm drains or other areas located downstream that are not prone to erosion. 5. All areas of exposed soil will be vegetated or covered with a stable layer of mulch as soon as the site grading is completed. All slope areas will be planted with trees, shrubs, and ground covers that are both appropriate for the area and are known to be effective for erosion O control. A list of suggested plants for slope retention and stabilization is provided in Appendix 5. Although home construction on the Kohala Shoreline property, if done poorly, could add slightly to sedimentation, careful development can actually substantially reduce the amount of sediment-laden runoff that enters the ocean relative to the no-development condition. This is because the current I site is typical of the leeward North Kohala coast,with many bare or poorly vegetated areas subject U to overgrazing by goats and the ravages of fire. Without management,the cycle of alien grass proliferation, overgrazing, fire, erosion, and soil depletion will continue indefinitely. The extensive array of measures that will be required as part of development by regulations, laws and CC&R mandated actions will minimize erosion and sedimentation. Although the property is responsible for less than 3 percent of the runoff that flows in deep gulches through the property—with areas upland responsible for 97 percent—it is still possible to make a meaningful reduction. Any reduction is critical. In the opinion of the DLNR Division of Aquatic Resources,repeated high runoff has measurably affected coral cover. The need for reducing sedimentation to maintain and improve the Ci aquatic biota is carried through in Section 3.1.4,below. Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Groundwater Development of any area can bring about changes in groundwater quantity and chemistry. In general,the impacts from a project as small as a six-lot subdivision are very small, and perhaps undetectable through sampling,but the quantity of impact can be modeled. Water is needed for in- home and landscape irrigation uses. For this area of North Kohala,where water systems are private and there is no long-distance transport of domestic water into the area,water supply comes from local wells. Extracting and utilizing this water diverts it from entering the ocean as groundwater. However, much or even most of that water is recirculated back into the ground through wastewater 36 � Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision t_ C� i ' and that fraction of irrigation water that is not evaporated from the ground or transpired by plants. In dry areas such as leeward Kohala, about 15 percent of the irrigation water returns. The"return flow" can contain various amounts of pollutants including nutrients and chemicals. Keeping these r i pollutants to a minimum so as not to degrade receiving waters requires effective wastewater (J treatment and proper irrigation and cultivation practices, as discussed in the design concepts above. The relationship among these factors can be modeled conceptually: ( j Groundwater flow beneath property post-development Groundwater flow beneath property pre-development-Water extracted in wells for development+ �� (irrigation return flow+Wastewater return flow) U The hydrologic assessment on water resources in Appendix 7, coupled with the investigations by marine biologists for the project previously proposed for the property(Marine Research Consultants i 2010,2015) evaluated the hydrological factors,water chemistry dynamics and marine habitat of the area. The hydrologic assessment specifically addressed the development of 6 homes utilizing ( potable water for home use and landscaping under two different scenarios. One is a low-use tU scenario of 750 gallons per day(gpd),which will be encouraged by the CC&Rs that require a reduced water use footprint in conformance with Low Impact Design Guidelines with low-water use �1 fixtures and landscaping limited to xerophytic'species. The second is a higher scenario of 1,500 gallons per day,which would be more typical of resort housing with some restrictions on landscaping. In addition to home use, it is assumed that the subdivision entry feature and public parking area will utilize 1,300-1,500 gpd. Table 3 presents and provides the rationale for expected water quantity and chemistry values resulting from development of homes under the two scenarios. Table 3. Potential Changes to Groundwater Discharging Al ng Proper Shoreline U Component of Flow Flowrate Nitrogen Phosphorus GD Ibs/day) (Ibslda C'1 Pre-Development 0.80 7.7902 0.7127 j Groundwater Withdrawal Kohala Ranch Wells,750 d -0.0028 -0.0268 -0.0024 Groundwater Withdrawal(Kohala Ranch Wells, 1,500 d -0.0052 -0.0512 -0.0046 5 Percolation of Wastewater from Leach Field +0.0028 +0.0337 +0.0037 ' Excess Landscape Irrigation 750 d +0.0006 +0.0054 +0.0005 Excess Landscape Irrigation 1,500 d +0.0012 +0.0120 +0.0010 Capture and Disposal of Increase of Rainfall Runoff in Drywells +0.0014 0.0076 0.0005 Resulting Post-Development Calculated Flowrate 750 d in MGD 0.8010 7.8101 0.7150 Calculated Flowrate 1,500 d in MGD +0.7992 7.7923 0.7133 " Change Over Pre-Development Condition 750 d in% +0.12% +0.26% +0.32% Change Over Pre-Development Condition 1,500 d in% -0.10% +0.03% +0.08% Source:Appendix 7.Two scenarios of average water use/home are presented:750 gpd and 1,500 gpd Notes: Of the 0.85 MGD of groundwater flowing beneath the property and discharging at the shoreline,its average salinity is 5.0 PPT and its nitrogen and phosphorus concentrations are the same as in Well 6451-03 (see Table 2). Salinity changes are negligible and thus not listed in table. Nutrient changes from wastewater based on planned advanced wastewater treatment systems. Evaluations of changes to groundwater flux and composition resulting from the proposed six-lot subdivision indicate that groundwater flow along the half-mile of coastline fronting the property 37 i � Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision would essentially stay the same, varying from an increase of 0.12%under the 750 gpd/home scenario to -0.10%under the 1,500 gpd/home scenario.Accompanying the changes in flow rates would be very relatively small increases in nutrient loading of far less than 0.5% under for nitrogen or phosphorus under any scenario. The calculated potential changes to groundwater discharging along the project's shoreline are so small as to be undetectable relative to natural seasonal variations of these parameters. Furthermore, dilution of groundwater at the shoreline and within the nearshore zone by turbulent mixing will result in essentially no change to groundwater-marine water dynamics. Even if measured concentrations of nutrients are increased by the projected amounts with the development in place, nearshore waters are so well-mixed by ocean waves that there is little likelihood that concentrations will increase beyond the present ranges of conditions. It is also noteworthy that post-development nutrients in the effluent groundwater would be considerably lower than in naturally occurring groundwater in other areas of West Hawaii. Elevated nutrient levels at the shoreline as a result of groundwater discharge are natural conditions along the entirety of the West Hawaii shoreline. This has occurred as long as the island has existed, pre-dating any human activities. In fact, based on the data collected for this project,the North Kohala coastline experiences some of the smallest discharges of groundwater along the entire West Hawaii coastline owing to the local geologic and hydrologic processes. Areas with substantially higher natural groundwater input that also contain measurable inputs from human activities, such as the South Kohala and North Kona shorelines, contain some of the most well developed coral reef habitats in Hawaii. It has been well documented that discharge of groundwater at these areas is not a negative factor with respect to reef development, lending support to the conclusion that the miniscule addition of nutrients off the property will have no adverse effect on water quality. In summary,results of the water chemistry analysis indicate that theredoes not appear to be any potential for substantial project-related adverse impacts to marine waters off the property. Changes of land use associated with the proposed project should not change water quality of the offshore area to any discernible extent. Through its methodology of sampling well water in the lower areas of Kohala Ranch,this analysis considered the cumulative nutrient effects of the project plus those of this large residential agricultural subdivision situated mauka of the Kohala Shoreline property. It is important to note concerning water quality that water is a public trust resource. This applies to all water resources without exception. It is the duty of agencies to try to maintain waters in their U natural state,protect water for use in drinking,maintain water for Native Hawaiian use, and protect reserved water per water code. Applicants who wish to utilize water must show that: LIII 1. There is no harm in fact, or 2. That any potential harm does not preclude a finding that the requested use is nevertheless reasonable and beneficial. 38 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision Furthermore,the applicant: 1. Is obligated to demonstrate affirmatively that the proposed use will not affect a protected use; 2. Must demonstrate the absence of a practicable alternative water source; and 3. If the impact is found to be reasonable and beneficial, then in light of the cumulative impact j of existing and proposed diversions on trust purposes,must implement reasonable measures (-J to mitigate this impact. The use of groundwater to sustain homes in this area zoned by the County and State for housing is a reasonable and beneficial use, and the measures the applicant proposes to be required as a condition of permits are both the maximum measures feasible and will effectively protect the water resources from harm. U 3.1.4 Flora, Fauna and Ecosystems U A terrestrial biological survey was conducted at several times between 2010 and 2018 by Ron Terry, Ph.D.,the results of which are presented in Appendix 2 and summarized below. Prior work in the offshore waters off the property documented in Marine Research Consultants (MRC 2010); U with additional unpublished survey work done in 2015, evaluated nearshore water chemistry and assessed impacts of altering groundwater quality and chemistry,providing the basis for the analysis in this section. n Existing Terrestrial Biology As typical for the region,the property is thickly covered with alien vegetation. Virtually the entire site is dominated by a low forest of scattered kiawe(Prosopis pallida)with an understory of buffel L)I grass (Cenchrus ciliaris).A total of 30 plant species was identified(Table 4). Only four common plants,the roadside herb 'uhaloa(Waltheria indica),the cherished yellow-flowered 'ilima(Sida fallax),the shoreline succulent 'akulikuli(Sesuvium portulacastrum), and the strand vine pa'ii 0 Hi'iaka(Jacquemontia ovalifolia), are indigenous to the Hawaiian Islands. All plant species observed in the survey are listed in Table 3 below. No threatened or endangered plant species (USFWS 2019)are present or would be expected on the property. Furthermore,no plant critical 1 Li 1 habitat is present on the property or within four miles of the property (https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html). The closest plant critical habitat is at above 2,000 feet in elevation in the Kohala Mountains. Fauna The mammalian fauna of the project area is composed mainly of introduced species, including small Indian mongooses (Herpestes a. auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis cattus),roof rats (Rattus r. rattus), Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus), European house mice(Mus domesticus)and possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis).None are of conservation concern and all are deleterious to native flora and fauna. 39 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Table 4. Plant S ecies on Property Scientific Name Family Common Name Life Form Status* Abutilon incanum Malvaceae Hoary abutilon Herb A Atriplex semibaccata Chenopodiaceae Australian saltbush Herb A Boerhavia coccinea Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia Herb A Cenchrus ciliaris Poaceae Buffel grass Grass A Cenchrus setaceus Poaceae Fountain grass Grass A Chamaesyce hirta Eupborbiaceae Garden spurge Shrub A Chenopodium murale Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Herb A Cleome gynandra Capparaceae Spider flower Herb A Commelina benghalensis Commelinaceae Hairy honohono Herb A lj Cucumis dipsaceus Cucurbitaceae Hedgehog gourd Vine A Desmodium sp. Fabaceae Desmodium Vine A Eragrostis amabilis Poaceae _ Love ass Grass A Festuca bromoides Poaceae Brome fescue Grass A Ficus microcarpa Moraceae Chinese banyan Tree A Jacquemontia ovq4fl?lia Convolyulaceae Pa'ii 0 Hijaka Vine I Lantana camara Verbenaceae Lantana Shrub A Leonotis nepeq6dia Lamiaceae Lion's ear Herb A Leucaena leucocephala Fabaceae Haole koa Tree A L Merremia aegyptia Convolvulaceae Hairy merremia Vine A Portulaca oleracea Portulacaceae Pigweed Herb A Portulaca pilosa Portulacaceae Portulaca Herb A C� Prosopis pallida Fabaceae Kiawe Tree A Ricinus communis Euphorbiaceae Castor bean Shrub A Sesuvium portulacastrum Aizoaceae Akulikuli Herb I Sidafallwc Malvaceae 'llinia Shrub I Sida rhombi olio Malvaceae Broom weed Herb A Spergula arvensis Caryophyllaceae Com spurry Herb A Li Verbesina encelloides Asteraceae Golden crown beard I Herb A Tribulus terrestris Zygophyllaceae Puncture vine Herb A Waltheria indica Sterculiaceae 'Uhaloa Herb I A=alien;I=indigenous;botanical names follow Wagner,Herbst and Soluner 1990,as updated. j Almost all birds seen on the site were wide-ranging aliens such as common mynas (Acridotheres tristis),yellow-billed cardinals (Paroaria capitata), saffron finches (Sicalisflaveola), gray francolins (Francolinus pondicerianus) and zebra doves (Geopelia striata). Other than the common shorebird 'ulili or wandering tattler(Heteroscelus incanus) and the Pacific golden-plover or kolea (Pluvialisfulva),which were observed right on the shoreline rocks,no birds indigenous to Hawaii were identified during the survey. No critical habitat(https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html) for terrestrial fauna is present in the area,but some endangered species may overfly this and all other areas of the Island of Hawaii. The Hawaiian petrel(Pterodroma sandwichensis),the Hawaiian sub-species of Newell's shearwater(Puffinus newelli), and the band-rumped storm-petrel (0ceanodroma castro)have been recorded over-flying various areas on the Island of Hawaii between late April and the middle of 40 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision December each year. The Hawaiian petrel and band-rumped storm-petrel are listed as endangered, and Newell's shearwater as threatened,under both federal and State of Hawaii endangered species statutes. These seabirds hunt over the ocean during the day and fly to higher elevations at night to roost and nest. The Hawaiian petrel and the band-rumped storm petrel are known to nest at elevations well above 5,000 feet on the Big Island,nowhere near the property. But during it breeding season from April through November,the Newell's shearwater burrows under ferns on forested mountain slopes. These burrows are used year after year and usually by the same pair of birds. Although capable of climbing shrubs and trees before taking flight, it needs an open downhill flight path through which it can become airborne. Once abundant on all the main Hawaiian Islands, most Newell's shearwaters are today found in the steep terrain between 500 to 2,300 feet on Kaua'i (https://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/fauna/newellsshearwater.html). The primary cause of mortality for all three species in Hawaii is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the nesting colonies. Collision with man-made structures is another significant cause.Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their way to sea in the summer and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Disoriented seabirds may collide with manmade structures and, if not killed outright,become easy targets of predatory mammals. These listed seabirds would not directly utilize the property but could occasionally overfly it. The only native Hawaiian land mammal,the Hawaiian hoary bat(Lasiurus cinereus semotus),may also occur in the area, as it has been observed in almost all parts of the island of Hawaii.Although the sparse kiawe-buffel grass vegetation of the site does not represent essential habitat for this lJ endangered species,bats have been observed in kiawe scrub vegetation in other parts of West Hawaii, and are undoubtedly present at least occasionally. Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Terrestrial Biology In order to frame impacts to terrestrial flora and fauna, it is relevant that the property has been historically used for ranching,has been intensely affected by wildfire and is dominated by introduced plant species. As illustrated in Figure 4,the project will include gradual planting of native plants around homes near the shoreline with the intent to restore native species to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the area. The plants envisioned—including pohuehue(Ipomoeapes-caprae),p5.'ii-O-Hi'iaka(Jacquemontia ovalifolia), 'ilima(Sidafallax), Ll 6helo kai (Lycium sanchvicense), akulikuh (Sesuvium portulacastrum),hinahina(Heliotropium anomalum) and kauna'oa(Cuscuta sandwichiana)—were selected because they were observed to be thriving on the site and/or in nearby areas without benefit of irrigation. Although low-lying and I Li often grayish green and inconspicuous,with small flowers and fruit,they represent the natural vegetation and have rich cultural associations as well. These plants can be slowly added with and planned improvements to the ora,the gradual effort. Considering the existing environment nn fl development will produce almost no impacts to any species of flora and fauna other than the alien species already present. However, several mitigation measures that protect wide-ranging endangered animal species are recommended. To minimize impacts to the endan'gered Hawaiian hoary bat, initial infrastructure contract conditions and homeowner construction CC&Rs will prohibit removal or trimming of woody plants 41 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LJ D taller than 15 feet from June I to September 15 each year. This period is the most vulnerable time in P, the bat birthing and pup rearing season, and refraining from vegetation removal or trimming is recognized as appropriate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in recent Endangered Species Act consultations (e.g., see Hawaii State DHHL 2009). 0 Outdoor lighting at homes can attract threatened or endangered seabirds,which may become disoriented by the lighting,resulting in downed birds. To avoid the potential downing of these seabirds by interaction with outdoor lighting,no construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting will be permitted after dark between the months of April and October. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to FJI lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. nExisting Marine Biota Overall, the biotic composition of the coral reef communities as revealed during intensive investigation of three transects fronting the property conforms to the typical zonation pattern that has D been well documented for the West Hawaii area(Dollar 1983,Dollar and Tribble 1992,MRC 2010). The majority of the shoreline throughout the property is composed of wave-cut vertical basaltic cliffs several meters high that extend below the waterline for an additional several meters, U forming the intertidal* zone. In several locations that are the shoreline termini of intermittent streams, the shoreline is composed of small beaches covered with boulders and rounded rocks. At these locales,the boulders continue through the nearshore area. The nearshore boulders are essentially devoid of macrobenthos,probably as a result of rolling during periods of large waves breaking on the shoreline. 0 In areas where boulders do not occur,the reef zone nearest to shore consists of submerged basaltic spurs and outcrops that are colonized primarily by the hemispherical branching coral Pocillopora meandrina. This coral has been termed a"pioneering" species in that it is generally the first to settle on newly bared substratum and is often the only coral that has the ability to withstand the physical rigor of water movement within the nearshore zone. It is also of note that unlike many other species of reef building coral,Pocillopora meandrina has a"determinate" life history in that it only grows to maximum size or age before colonies die. Hence,natural communities of this species are often composed of a mixture of live colonies and dead skeletal remains. The other common macroinvertebrates that occupy the nearshore zone are the boring sea urchins Echinometra matheai and Echinostrephus aciculatus. These urchins are major bioeroders on the Li rock surfaces and are found in pits that are ground out of the basalt. F-I Beginning at approximately 35 feet from the shoreline cliffs,the bottom is composed of a basalt _J i platform that extends from depths of about 15 feet to about 30 feet. Off the property,the reef platform is nearly completely covered with growth of living corals. The two species that cover of the platform are helmet-shaped lobed colonies of Porites lobata and finely branching mats of Porites LI compressa. Density of Porites lobata is highest near the shoreline,with gradually increasing proportions of P. compressa in the offshore direction. The solid reef structure of the platform �J 42 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision contains intermittent pockets and channels of coarse white sand. In the 2010 survey(MRC 2010), there was no evidence of any type of damage or environmental impacts (e.g.,bleaching, disease) throughout the range of the survey. While species of the genus Porites dominated coral cover on the reef platform., several other species were observed in very low density, including Montiporapatula, M capitata and Pavona varians. There were no observations of any stands of macroalgae on the reef platform. Communities of reef fish were also typical of West Hawaii,with few observations of large fish that would be categorized as target species for spearfishers. Subsequent to the re-evaluation of marine community structure in March 2015, a major bleaching event occurred throughout much the world's tropical oceans in the summer of 2015. Many Hawaiian reefs have been subjected to anomalously warm water resulting in unprecedented bleaching of corals, including the reefs of West Hawaii.Fortunately, corals often recover when the temperature stress is removed. Surveys of coral communities statewide are documenting the level of impact to coral communities resulting from the bleaching event, as well as the progress of recovery from this latest event, as indicated in a study by The Nature Conservancy (htlps://www.staradvertiser.com/2019/01/23/breaking-news/nature-conservancy-survff-finds- J hawaii-island-reefs-under-recovery/accessed January 2019). Unfortunately,the steady increase in ocean temperature and acidification that is occurring with climate change will likely lead to longer Eand more intense bleaching episodes in the future,which is of grave concern. At approximately the 30-foot depth,the gently sloping reef platform terminates at an edge marked by a sharply increasing angle of the bottom. Coral community structure near the shelf break and on the shelf slope is composed primarily of solid interconnected mats of finely branched Porites compresses,which is commonly known as finger coral. As with the reef platform,no frondose algae were observed on the reef slope. At a depth of approximately 60 feet,the reef slope and mats of finger coral terminate in a sand plain with corals growing on isolated rocks and rock rubble. The overall coral community composition off the project site can be characterized as a near-climax successional stage of Hawaiian reef development. Living coral of two species virtually covered the entire hard bottom on the reef platform and slope, eliminating competition for space for other coral species or other forms of bottom cover. The near complete cover indicates that the area is well protected from natural stresses,particularly the storm waves that are the major determinate of community structure on reefs in Hawaii. Coastal waters and beaches of the Kona and Kohala coasts are well-documented feeding areas for endangered green sea turtles (Chelonia mydas). Also seen occasionally are endangered Hawaiian hawksbill turtles (Eretmochelys imbricata) and Hawaiian monk seals (Monachus schauinslandi). The waters surrounding the entire Big Island are critical habitat for the monk seal. The Impact of Sediment One of the transects, in the marine studies that is 2,000 feet south of the property, adjacent to a gulch, had high runoff in 2009 and 2010(MRC 20 10) and again in 2015 (MRC,unpublished data). Inspection here t provided an opportunity to review the response of the marine environment to extreme sediment events. A scenario that likely occurs in this area is that intermittent heavy rainfall 43 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision results in discharge of sediment-laden water at the shoreline. This sediment settles out in the nearshore region and may be of a magnitude to smother corals situated on the rocky bottom. Following the storm event,normal wave action flushes the sediment from the area,re-exposing the boulder surfaces. If corals previously inhabiting the rocks are smothered and killed,the remaining skeletons may be bioeroded from the rock surface or removed by wave impacts. Following the removal of sediment,rock surfaces are suitable for settlement of new colonies,which is the stage observed during the present survey. Growth of these new recruits continues until another episode of sediment input occurs. Hence, if there is a relatively small interval between incidents of sediment (J input,the nearshore zone may remain essentially devoid of mature coral colonies. However, if there is a period between episodes of sediment input that is long relative to the growth cycle of corals,the new recruiting corals may develop into larger"mature"colonies. Within this scenario is the compounding effect of stress from wave energy. Once colonies reach a certain size, impacts from extreme wave forces may limit development. In any event, it is evident that coral community structure is dynamic in nature, and dependent on the magnitude of natural stresses, and the interaction between these stresses. Comments from the DLNR-Division of Aquatic Resources(DAR)of August 2,2015, in response to the Draft EA for the original Kohala Shoreline Project(Kohala Shoreline LLC 2015) indicated a different assessment of the health of the aquatic biota in this area. DAR stated that: F1 The proposed project site is one of the areas where extensive sedimentation onto to the nearshore reef has negatively impacted the adjacent coral reef community. This was first documented in October 2006. One of the most heavily impacted reef areas was directly shoreward of Keawewai Gulch which runs right through the subject property. Sediment impacts were noted down to at least 70 feet. The Keawewai impacted site was subsequently revisited five additional times with accumulation of sediment and dead corals noted as recently as August 2010,the most recent site visit. Given the above observations it is quite perplexing as to why the March 2010 Assessment of Marine Water Chemistry and Marine Biotic Comm-unities by Marine Research Consultants, Inc. failed to report any accumulated sediments or impacted corals in their report which was Fdone five months prior to the last DAR site visit(August 2010). Indeed,they note that "Effects to reef structure from substantial sediment input are not evident throughout the area fronting the Kohala Shoreline LLC property." This is also minored in the DEA itself which states"Overall,the water off the project site is very clear and clean,with no apparent human- induced pollution problems."However,the consultant found that on transects within 50 in of the shoreline most of the values of turbidity exceed DOH water quality standards. Such 1 U turbidity is also reflected in a 2015 Goggle [sic] Earth image of the shoreline area which apparently shows suspended sediments in the near shore waters. DAR has two long-term coral reef monitoring sites in the vicinity of the project site at Waiaka'ilio Bay. One is almost directly offshore of the northern boundary of the proposed project while the other(Kamilo) is one half mile to the north. At both of these sites the percentage of live coral cover on the reef has substantially and significantly declined over the past 16 years. At Waiaka'ilio, coral cover has decreased 11.3%while at Kamilo it has 44 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision LJ decreased 14.6%. These findings point out the continued stress the coral reef in these areas is facing and the need to be highly proactive in any activities that may further stress these communities. F-i Given these very real concerns,the project needs to ensure that Best Management Practices are strictly followed, if not exceeded, in all areas of site development and construction. Special attention should be focused on not further exacerbating erosional issues with EJ Keawewai Gulch and partnering with Kohala Ranch to ensure upland land use practices do not impact water quality and nearshore marine communities. hi These concerns should be framed in the context of trends that DAR has been closely monitoring over the last 15 years.A recent assessment summarized this as follows: Ecosystem indicators compiled for coral reef fishes have shown an overall trend towards a community of smaller, more abundant fishes. From 2003 to 2014,mean fish length, an indicator of adult reef fish size structure,has shown a decreasing trend in both the North and South regions of West Hawai'i.... Similarly,total fish biomass, an indicator of the entire fish community size, declined by—20% in the North over the same time frame while in the South, no overall net change was observed. Herbivorous fishes,which are important for coral reef ecosystem resilience,have also declined in biomass across West Hawaii over the past 12 years....Redlip Parrotfish.... a targeted herbivorous fish, is currently(2014) at a level of biomass that is considerably lower compared to the maximum biomass observed in 2007 and 2004 for the North and South regions, respectively. In contrast to the observed declines in the overall size structure of reef fishes in West Hawaii,total fish abundance has shown an increasing trend over the same time period,while juvenile yellow tang,which comprise —85% of the total aquarium fish catch, increased approximately three-to four-fold and are presently at the highest density levels since monitoring began in 1999. Ecosystem indicators related to benthic reef community integrity indicate a shift in West Hawaii towards lowered reef accretion and reduced structural complexity. Hard coral cover, an indicator of reef topographic complexity,habitat structure, and reef accretion, decreased from an average of 44%to 31% cover in the North from 2003 to 2014, a decline of roughly one-third in just.12 years (PIFSC 2016: i-ii). U1 The causes for this decline are complex and interwoven: L The population of Hawaii Island has increased by 320% in the last 56 years, increasing pressures on the marine environment such as coastal development,habitat degradation, fishing pressure, and nutrient pollution. Human wastewater, for example, is principally !L* disposed via on-site waste disposal systems in West Hawaii. Cesspools—where effluent receives no treatment prior to being released into the environment—comprise 85% of all on- site waste disposal systems in the region. Cesspools leech excess pollution and nutrients into L groundwater that flows to the ocean,threatening human health and degrading marine ecosystem integrity. The total number of on-site waste disposal systems in West Hawaii nearly doubled from 1995 to 2010 (PIFSC 2016: i). 45 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision L! L._ J Because these comments and research are from an agency charged with assessing and protecting the l I aquatic environment in Hawaii,Kohala Shoreline requested additional survey and analysis to ascertain the reasons for the differences in assessment of the health of the aquatic biota between DAR and MRC. MRC was asked to inspect of the offshore area again in 2015. Their survey IJ indicated no significant changes from 2009 and 2010 and revealed the same processes of episodic sediment input. Coral recruitment and growth had continued.MRC concluded that the offshore reef [� remained relatively unaffected in any permanent way by sediment input at the shoreline. �J The fundamental difference between the two assessments is that DAR's position stresses that the (� order of magnitude of sediment input from the gulches of North Kohala is a recent and largely U anthropogenic condition to which the local coral and other biota have not been able to adapt. This opinion is based on a series of marine surveys that clearly show high levels of sedimentation,trash and organic debris littering the ocean, coupled with field visits to sites in the drainage basin that lJ revealed highly inadequate sediment control measures associated with some development and land use. This is particularly important because it is combined with other causes of coral reef decline. t+� MRC's contention is that while periodic sedimentation events do affect nearshore areas, and some (J events are exacerbated{or even wholly caused}by human action,which induces locally substantial but temporary damage, sedimentation events are basically normal processes that shape marine I ` communities. In this particular environment, the communities are resilient enough to recover from J most sedimentation events. The gulches of the Kohala Mountains, which long precede human presence on the island, are the result of steady erosion,the sediment products of which have been �J deposited in the shoreline area for millennia. The gulches that pass through the property were carved out over geologic time by flood events that carry sediment laden water. The marine environment is n adapted to such long-term periodic stress from sedimentation events,but human contributions should I nonetheless be minimized. The differences between these perspectives is interesting and important,but all parties involved are likely in agreement concerning several points: 1. In the big picture in North Kohala,the main culprit responsible for excessive sedimentation L? is overgrazing by cattle and feral ungulates on typically dry lands. When combined with the twin and interrelated scourges of wildfire and fire-adapted alien grasses, sediment discharge to the ocean following periodic severe rainfall events can be substantial. Inadequate J sediment control measures during development and urban land uses that are inexcusable and often illegal add to this problem. 2. The vast majority of the sediment in gulches on the Kohala Shoreline property J originates in the 97% plus of the gulch drainage basins that are mauka of Akoni Pule Highway. Only the last few hundred yards of these seven-mile long gulches pass through the property itself,which is currently in an entirely natural condition, albeit affected by feral goats, alien grasses and periodic wildfires. 3. Regardless of the adaptability of the coral communities offshore to sedimentation, there is a need to avoid any additional sedimentation from the proposed subdivision, and, in fact, to reduce it from existing levels to the greatest level feasible. Whatever the degree of the resilience of the coral ecosystem,home development should not be allowed to test it. 46 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision .F7 I L!! 4. Climate change,particularly warmer and more acidic ocean waters that lead to coral bleaching, is the greatest threat to the coral ecosystem. All development needs to utilize design and technologies that help stem global warming. IJ impacts and Mitigation Measures to Marine Biota The health of the marine community is directly tied to water quality. For this among other reasons, reason,the 6-lot subdivision project currently reduced the number of homes from previous proposals over the years,which had between 9 and 50 homes. Even more importantly,the project features a requirement for advanced treatment unit septic systems that can minimize nutrients. As a result,the predicted changes in water quality constituents detailed above in Section 3.1.3 are negligible(less than a half percent)and within the natural variability of the groundwater-marine water mixing regime. In,fact,the groundwater in this area will continue to have nutrient concentrations far below typical natural concentrations in West Hawaii. Notably,the subsidies of nutrients are small in comparison to other documented situations in West Hawaii where anthropogenic inputs have been quantified. For example, leaching of golf course nutrients resulted in an increase over natural flux of about 116%N and 22%P to a semi-enclosed embayment(Keauhou Bay). While these increases are orders of magnitude greater than predicted at the property, there was no measurable nutrient uptake within Keauhou Bay, and no alteration of biotic composition(Dollar and Atkinson.1992). Similarly,nutrients subsidies resulted in increased N and P flux to anchialine ponds at Waikoloa of about 229% and 400%,respectively. Even with such high nutrient subsidies to ponds that reflect substantial nutrient subsidies to groundwater, offshore sites at Waikoloa downgradient from these ponds on wave-exposed coastlines showed no input over natural sources (Dollar and Atkinson 1992). As the wave-exposed shorelines at Waikoloa are probably less turbulent than off the property, it can be expected that the small changes in groundwater nutrient concentrations will likewise have no effect to the marine environment. In addition to consideration of the effects from nutrient additions, it is also important to consider the potential effect of sedimentation that may occur as a result of construction activities. The property is L: presently comprised of extensive areas of soil and rock,with relatively little vegetative groundcover, especially during droughts. As discussed extensively above in Section 3.1.3,Best Management Practices in association with grading and NPDES permits and additional BMPS based on local BMP practices as well as Low Impact Design Guidelines adapted specifically to the site will be required by CC&Rs. This will limit the area of excavation at any one time, control sediment onsite, and require dust control measures. During home occupation, a host of permanent practices L will be required that will drastically reduce the potential for sedimentation relative to existing conditions and unregulated site development. To summarize the discussion earlier in this section, these will include gulch buffers; strict building envelopes outside of which are reserved"Natural Areas"; blending of all cut and fill slopes into the natural topography; reduction of impervious surfaces to the smallest area possible; and alternate approaches to slope retention and stabilization, utilizing curved, organic forms and stone that is native to the area. Together,these will provide an ongoing check on sediment that flows into the ocean. Although development activities on the Kohala Shoreline property, if done poorly, can add slightly to these sedimentation problems, careful 47 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision D LI, development can actually substantially reduce the amount of sediment that enters the ocean relative to the no-development condition. P All of these considerations indicate that the proposed 6-lot project will not have any significant negative, or likely even measurable, effect on marine biota in the coastal ocean offshore of the property. Projected changes in groundwater are negligible and remain well within the wide variation in nutrient concentrations of West Hawaii. This coupled with the strong mixing characteristics of the nearshore environment indicates that changes to the marine environment from added nutrients from the homes will likely be undetectable,with no measurable change from the present conditions. When combined with the features of the project that have the potential to substantially reduce property-related sedimentation currently affecting the reefs, development of the project should have �J no adverse effect on marine communities. 3.1.5 Air Quality,Noise, and Scenic Resources t Environmental Setting Over the last thirty years, air pollution in West Hawaii has mainly come from volcanic emissions of sulfur dioxide,which convert into particulate sulfate and produce a volcanic haze(vog) from Kilauea. Vog has persistently blanketed North and South Kona, at least until the cessation(perhaps temporary)of volcanic activity on Kilauea in August 2018. However, air quality in Kohala has been generally good,with the most noticeable degradation occurring when occasional southerly winds would carry vog into the area. Noise on the property is low to moderate and is derived principally from roadway noise from the adjacent Akoni Pule Highway, as well as activities on developed land mauka of the highway. Waiaka`ilio Bay, on the northern end of the property(see Figures 1-3), along with the entire coastal viewplane from Akoni Pule Highway, is listed in the Hawaii County General Plan as a place of natural beauty. The roughly eight-mile stretch along Akoni Pule Highway between Mahukona in the north and the 3,500-acre plus,upscale rural residential subdivision Kohala Ranch in the south, is mostly undeveloped shoreline,with highly scenic expansive vistas both mauka and makai..Hawaii State Senate Concurrent Resolution(SCR)No. 179,H.D. 1, adopted in 1988,urged the retention of { , view and open space makai of Kawaihae-Mahukona-Hawi Road from Kawaihae to Upolu Point. In 2001, SCR 146 summarized the long history of public sentiment to maintain viewplanes makai of Akoni Pule Highway as expressed in legislative resolutions,petitions, and plans. SCR 146 urged the State and County of Hawaii "to work collaboratively with the community and residents of Kohala to develop and implement a plan to protect the open nature of the Kohala coast,preserve its valuable historic sites, and provide greater awareness and appreciation of the history and cultural 1 significance of the area for residents and visitors alike."As listed within the comment letter to the U Draft EA provided by Ka Makani O Kohala Ohana—Kako`o (see Appendix 1b1.there have been a number of legal challenges,petitions, government resolutions.letters. and plans that sought to LI preserve the open space characteristics of the North Kohala Coast in general over the last 50 years. U", 48 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F Concern with the viewplanes was subsequently evinced in the Hawaii County General Plan and the North Kohala Community Development Plan(North Kohala CDP). The County has acquired 238 acres of shorefront property at Ka'iholena North and Pdo'o, located approximately five miles north of the property. These properties,which contain over 4,000 feet of shoreline,were identified in the North Kohala CDP as important areas for protection for recreational,historical and cultural reasons. The North Kohala CDP identifies the Kohala Shoreline property on the North Kohala Environmental&Cultural Concept Map (p. 25) as within or near both the"High Concentration of Cultural Sites"coastal area and the "Existing Upscale Development Area." The property and its undeveloped coastline lie directly makai of the developed area of Kohala Ranch and adjacent to the Kohala Kai agricultural subdivision. Additionally,the property is within the State Land Use Urban District and is currently zoned by the County as Single-Family Residential(RS-15). Impacts and Mitigation Measures Construction of the project will involve excavation, grading, compressors,vehicle and equipment engine operation, and construction of new infrastructure. These activities have the potential to generate noise exceeding 95 decibels at times,impacting nearby sensitive noise receptors on the margins of the development. Whenever construction noise is expected to exceed the DOH's maximum permissible"property-line noise levels, contractors will be required to consult with DOH per Title 11, Chapter 46,HAR(Community Noise Control)prior to construction. DOH would then review the proposed activity, location, equipment,project purpose and timetable in order to decide whether a permit is necessary and what conditions and mitigation measures, such as restriction of equipment type,maintenance requirements,restricted hours, and portable noise barriers, will be necessary. The contractor would consult with DOH to determine whether permit restrictions would consist of construction being limited to daylight hours. On a permanent basis, future legal uses of the properties for single-family residences will also generate noise consistent with expectations and allowable limits in areas zoned for these uses, which is thus not considered an adverse impact. ii SMA 379 required the following: * Condition 5 required that above ground structures would be set back a minimum of 50 feet from the mauka property line along Akoni Pule Highway to meet visual impacts concerns. 0 Condition 6 required a preliminary site plan that would create mauka-makai view corridors IJ from Akoni Pule Highway would be submitted in conjunction with the subdivision plans and approved by the Planning Department. Condition I of Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required that all electrical and communication lines within the subject property would be placed underground. L Although the proposed six-lot subdivision is far smaller and less impactful than the project for which these conditions were approved, somewhat similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit and Rezoning Ordinance for the project. L 49 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F1 Project design will meet or exceed these conditions. The owner proposes to have all homes set back from Akoni Pule Highway by a minimum of 150 feet, and 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road,with a maximum height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25 of the Hawaii County Code. CC&Rs will require a color scheme featuring earth-tone colors to harmonize with the existing landscape tones. As discussed in Section 3.1.4,the project will include gradual planting of native plants near the shoreline in order to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the public access area. All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. Conceptual computer-generated simulations of the future appearance of the area after development have been prepared. Figures 9a and 9b,respectively,provide views from the vantages of a driver on Akoni Pule Highway and a low-flying aircraft just offshore. The point at Waiaka'ilio Bay, listed in the General Plan as an example of natural beauty,will remain visible from the highway, albeit with a mid-ground that might include a developed structure, depending on where on the highway it was viewed from. Although the six homes that would eventually be built will be visible, their visual impact potential has been minimized, and they will not appear out of character given the rural Ll residential and agricultural lots being developed in the area surrounding the project, and the urban appearance of coastal developments just to the south and in Kawaihae. The project will maintain the view corridors and scenic resources of this coastal area, including mauka-makai and lateral views. 3.1.6 Hazardous Materials,Toxic Substances and Hazardous Conditions Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures No Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed for the site, as there was no information LJ on the presence of hazardous materials or toxic substances on the property.No conditions or activities that would lead to such site contamination are known to be present or are expected to be present on the property. The property does not contain quarries, former explosives sites, or other hazardous conditions. The property is vacant and does not appear to have undergone any active land use in modem times. Although the property has been grazed,no farming has been conducted in modem times, and there is no known use that would have involved pesticides or industrial uses. An abandoned vehicle and litter from Akoni Pule Highway are present,but the history of the site and its surroundings as understood by the owner does not suggest the presence of hazardous materials or toxic substances. State databases did not indicate any Underground Storage Tanks (USTs),Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs), or records of incidents or releases on the site or in surrounding properties (https:Heha-cloud.doh.hawaii.gov/iheer/#!/Viewer). Although it is unlikely that any potentially hazardous,toxic or radioactive waste would be found on the project site, reasonable precautions would be undertaken by contractors in the context of the project construction Best Management Practices for the appropriate response and remediation should any such hazardous,toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during construction of the project. 50 U, Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision Figure 9a Simulated View from Road /rr Fr r � %,l��I/r/r rr/1 1 7� /��,� r,b� >/(fr e /p$n/ir y�' /r�//�/r/ml /lit////pfroll/i.F ! / ! r ✓/r! /,, : l�, � ,✓ �i��J�i��r� ?�l/l%1/��,1��/f r/r��ilyl�', /J�i��l'G����r/.// ,,r,:o, �/, �/�ar�����,ilf� .//i ,,,/,/�.,,,r r,r ,,,,N, „;, r v ! r � i �ra, n r �llri����,(`� ;:', r,'a„. /Pr✓�li/%!�� �i"YF rr rr/����1 lfi.%�lr/�i�%���/���/l�l�r���.,,. ,. I _.. G,;�,Jljr f� D J//,i !.i ,.,, �Jgr�. Ir`lr! Y//I fr ,!� / /,/ �✓i�rlfr'rf"r/i''l%�l / ��/(��� r � / 'h � (�'� U,�r� drr✓/n��/!�f'/r r Vii,!�Ir,,. ✓��1, rfi!fl�,/���/�I�l'1 �r���� ��� �, i,r ������,�,�r� � n l,�(Vii' W° y��%��/�j���/l��r�%✓r l>)'/l ��1fj1�<l�'f� Jr'%ii����'� y7 �l/°' „r r, I ✓r�l�!yr/���//i�ri%41��� ���/ JL r�, rrl �/%/%����ll/�I ��l i y 1 /,/r r���/„7f/i�f/Ilcr�&/r/l;A/.l�lrn,I/,Edi/!/,//��J��l�,li ��✓/r✓r„d6/r//�I�.r///�,nrr%5;'G t eu �7r✓a���/a/�11,„iNl�/ ,,.. r Figure 9b Simulated View from Ocean i,� J� �n,rr, �� ;��i��i/���1��/rr�i// � r ✓ r�lily`�rl ��✓I rmi / / I/// rl G,, �///�l%�,W/l lrr �//;/ ''f% r�//i! r Il r:��r �//?' / !�✓//:,�r���D /� /.//r/rir/�.J%��'�i ./rir// 1J��'v„` ! ✓r r nY✓,” r 51 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision FJ 3.2 Socioeconomic and Cultural 3.2.1 Socioeconomic Characteristics Existing Environment The proposed action would most directly affect the portions of rural North Kohala along Akoni Pule Highway and to a lesser extent the town of Kawaihae. Table 5 provides information on the socioeconomic characteristics of North Kohala, along with those of Hawaii County as a whole for comparison, from the 2010 U.S. Census of Population. Impacts The development of a 6-lot subdivision with lots that would all eventually contain residences would lead to only a minor increase in population.Based on the North Kohala average household size and vacancy rates, an increase of about 16 residents would occur, although some of the homes are expected to be occupied part-time by off-island residents. This would lead to minor shifts in demographic characteristics,unemployment rates, and demands on public services (see Section 3.3, below). Importantly,the population increase is consistent with the expectations of single-family zoning and low-density urban LUPAG designation. Mitigation Measures Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following: • Condition D. Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all proposed residential lots within the subject property shall prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit on each lot. A copy of the proposed covenants to be recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances shall be submitted with the plans for subdivision to the Planning Director for review and approval. A copy of the approved covenant(s) shall be recited in an instrument executed by the applicant and the County and recorded with the Bureau of Conveyances in conjunction with the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. • Condition L. To ensure that the goals and policies of the Housing Element of the General Plan are implemented,the applicant shall secure the concurrence of the Office of Housing E and Community Development that the applicant's affordable housing requirements, if any have been mutually agreed to prior to Final Subdivision Approval. U Although the proposed six-lot subdivision is far smaller and less impactful than the project for which these conditions were approved, somewhat similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the ordinance that would grant the change of zone to RA-5a. In particular,because the U subdivision involves five or more lots,the applicant would be required as part of the subdivision process to comply with the County's Affordable Housing Ordinance and thus contribute to affordable housing in the re U 52 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Table 5. Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics CHARACTERISTIC Hawaii Island North Kohala Total Population 187,044 6,579 A Percent White 33.0% 19.5% Percent Asian 17.1% 17.1% Percent Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 12.5% 12.5% Percent Two or More Races 28.9% 48.7% U r� Median Age(Years) 40.7 38.2 Percent Under 18 Years 22.5% 18.0% Percent 65 Years and Over 15.4% 16.2% Percent Households with Children 25.5% 29.0% Average Household Size 2.83 3.34 Percent Housing Vacant 22.0% 20.8% Percent Over 16 Years in Labor Force 61.2% 62.1% Median Household Income $51,520 $58,673 Percent Below Poverty Level 18.3% 18.1% Percent 25 years and older with High School 91.0% 93.3% Degree -Percent with Disability 13.5% 12.6% Percent Foreign Born 12.7% 8.06% P I I Source:U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder:http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 3.2.2 Coastal Recreation Site reconnaissance indicates that the property is lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers. Figure 11 of Appendix 3,the Cultural Impact Assessment for the Kohala Shoreline, LLC project,reproduces a portion of Register Map No. 2786 (dated 1917) indicating the presence of a lateral coastal trail projecting into the current project area. This trail is also shown on the 1935 edition of the Tax Map (Figure 16 of Appendix 3). As discussed in Section 3.2.4,this trail,which for many decades has been heavily altered for use as a jeep road, has been called the ala loa and has V . been assessed as a historic property subject to preservation in place. Mauka-makai vehicular access is currently available on the State parcel adjacent to and north of the property. Mauka-makai and lateral shoreline pedestrian public access is available on the Kohala Kai 53 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision n U F1, Subdivision,the private property immediately adjacent to and south of the Kohala Shoreline P property. There are a few lateral spurs of vehicular accesses onto the property,but there is no continuous lateral vehicular access across the property. On the property itself, a six-foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline is shown on the Land Court Map for the property. Although focused broadly on a long stretch of the coastline of the island of Hawaii,the planned development of the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail (NUT) is also an important potential recreational resource for Kohala. Established in 2000 for the preservation,protection and interpretation of traditional Native Hawaiian culture and natural resources,the Ala Kahakai NHT is a 175-mile trail corridor acknowledged for its cultural and historical significance. The National Park Service(NPS)prepared an EIS and a Comprehensive Management Plan(U.S. Department of the Interior 2008),which provided some of the information in this EA. The Ala Kahakai NHT traverses hundreds of ancient Hawaiian settlement sites through more than 200 ahupuaa currently owned by private interests and governmental bodies. Cultural resources along the Ala Kahakai include several important heiau,royal centers, kahua(house site F1 foundations), loko 'ia(fishponds)koa(fishing shrines),kiipdhaku(petroglyphs), holua(stone slides), and wahi pana(sacred places).Natural resources include anchialine ponds,pali(cliffs), nearshore reefs, estuarine ecosystems, coastal vegetation,migratory birds,native sea turtle habitat, and several threatened and endangered species of plants and animals. The EIS for the Ala Kahakai NHT considered No Action(A), Single Trail (B), and Ahupua'a Trail System (C)alternatives. Alternative C,the preferred alternative, is based on the traditional Hawaiian trail system in which multiple trail alignments within the ahupuaa(mountain to sea land division) are integral to land use and stewardship. Under the action proposed by NPS, a continuous trail parallel and adjacent to the shoreline would be protected with the consent and cooperation of the affected landowners; however, on public lands and where landowners wish it,the Ala Kahakai NHT could include inland portions of the ala loa or other historic trails that run lateral to the shoreline. The shoreline ala loa and Ala Kahakai alignment would be connected by mauka-makai (mountain to sea)trails equivalent or similar to those that would have traditionally been part of the ahupua'a system. During the 15-year planning period for the trail planning effort,the priority zone from Kawaihae south through Pu'uhonua o H6naunau National Park to Ho'okena(outside and to the south of the property)would be the focus for developing a continuous publicly accessible trail, but trail administration and management would protect and preserve trail sections outside of that zone as feasible. Through an agreement,the State of Hawaii could convey to the NPS a less-than- fee management interest in trail segments that are State-owned under the Highways Act of 1892 within the Ala Kahakai NHT corridor. The NPS would then be responsible for managing these segments and federal law would fully apply. However, in cooperation with the NPS, local communities of the ahupuaa would be encouraged to take responsibility for trail management using the traditional Hawaiian principles of land management and stewardship. The Ala Kahakai Trail Association would be expected to be robust enough to play a major part in trail management, promotion, and funding. Maps contained with the EIS for Alternative C are general; however,they clearly indicate a possible lateral trail passing through the property. Although the scale of the map is so small that the exact 1 54 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision alignments of these potential trails cannot be specified with precision, discussion with officials from the NPS as well as community members indicates that the ala loa,which is essentially located on the existing lateral jeep trail,would be the favored location for the Ala Kahakai. As such, for the purpose of this document, it is assumed that the alignment of the Ala Kahakai will be along the ala loa. The owner proposes that mauka-makai access to both the existing 6-foot wide lateral public access easement along the shoreline and the future Ala Kahakai be from a proposed 4-stall public access parking lot near the northern end of the property, as shown in Figure 31. Lateral and mauka- makai public access currently exists on both the northern, State-owned property and on the southern,private property, both of which will connect to the property's lateral public access easement and the future Ala Kahakai. The history of the ala loa trail on the property has been well documented. Hawaii Land Court records confirm that the historical alignment of the ala loa within the property is owned in fee simple by the owner. During the proceedings for Land Court Application No. 1036 in the 1930s,the Territory of Hawaii originally claimed ownership of the five(5)-foot wide "Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail,"also known as the ala loa trail, located within the property. As documented in a Stipulation filed on April 27, 1938,the Territory of Hawaii agreed to waive and withdraw its claims to the historical alignment of the ala loa trail within the property and other adjacent lands, in consideration of the agreement by the owner's predecessor-in-interest to convey certain roadway parcels in Waika,North Kohala,Hawaii to the Territory of Hawaii. Subsequently, the Land Court entered a Decision on May 9, 1938, confirming that title to the historical alignment of the ala loa trail segment running through the property was owned in fee simple by the owners of the surrounding lands. Therefore,the historical alignment of the ala loa trail within the property is not a State-owned trail. On November 20,2014,the State DLNR Na Ala Hele Trail &Access System Abstractor confirmed that the 1930s Land Court proceedings covering the property and adjacent,4ands resulted in a finding that"the Territory of Hawaii subsequently waived and withdrew its claim to all trails with the subject land." impacts and Mitigation Measures As shown in the Site Plan in Figure 3,the owner proposes to provide mauka-makai and lateral pedestrian public access through the property. Use of the shoreline area of the property for fishing, i I gathering and hiking would not be affected by the proposed development, as these activities can occur within the area of the existing coastal public access easement, and,when accepted as a public access easement by the County Council, along the proposed Ala Kahakai/ala loa public access easement. The outdoor activities and public access experience will be accommodated by the wide setback from the shoreline—extending all the way from the shoreline through the ala loa— that would prohibit development within the setback area. The owner will work with representatives from the federal Ala Kahakai NHT,the State's Na Ala Hele Trail&Access program, and the North Kohala Community Access Group to have the Ala Kahakai Trail constructed,presumably on the existing ala loa/jeep road,with appropriate adjustments to provide buffers for burial sites that the LLJ 1 The actual route will be not be a straight line as shown conceptually in Figure 3 but will involve a practical path down the slope that follows to the extent feasible the existing historic trail,as requested by cultural consultees.No encroachment into burial site buffer zones will—occur. 55 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Jeep road currently intrudes upon. ala loa alignment provides ample area for construction, maintenance and use of the Ala Kahakai. This trail alignment, expected to be 10 feet in width in conformance with both the design standards of the Ala Kahakai and Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code, will insure continued public access to and utilization of shoreline resources. Pedestrian access to this shoreline area at the property would be available from properties to the north or south using the lateral pedestrian shoreline trail, or by walking to the shoreline from the public parking area that would be built on the northern end of the property. The proposed four-stall P1 parking area(the same number of stalls required under SMA 379 for the 50-lot residential project) would be accessed from Akoni Pule Highway and the southern road access (see Figure 3). The parking area,which would be open from a half-hour before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset, would access a new 800-foot long, 10-foot wide mauka-makai pedestrian trail.No direct vehicular access to the shoreline would be allowed, either by residents or the general public. The establishment and maintenance of trail amenities as part of the Ala Kahakai on the property will facilitate coastal access and the continued use of the shoreline for recreational purposes, providing a net benefit to hiking use on the Ala Kahakai NHT and fishing and gathering on the shoreline. The current 6-foot wide trail easement on the shoreline is inadequate for shoreline access, as much of it is steep'and eroded. The applicant will seek to dedicate an easement on each lot makai of the ala loa/jeep road for the entire length of the property for public access, creating, in essence, a 50 to 250-foot wide"trail."It is expected that most hikers will utilize the ala loa/jeep road to traverse the property(and/or the Ala Kahakai,when constructed by government agencies),while fishermen may prefer to utilize the path directly along the shoreline. Discussion of construction of the Ala Kahakai NHT, including inventory and assessment of resources and possible side trails to coastal recreation locations or lookouts, is beyond the scope of this EA. These issues will be addressed during planning of the trail by the NPS and the State's Na. Ala Hele program. However, one aspect that does require analysis is the side-effect of increased public access on wildfire potential, as discussed in Section 3.1.1. If DLNR plans to intensify use of its property to the north in association with the Ala Kahakai NHT(or any other recreational amenity), it is recommended that the agency install signs warning of the possibility of fire, and also �J that it consider firebreaks. This recommendation is extended to any plans to encourage public use of trails along the North Kohala coastline; wildfire is a significant issue faced by the Ala Kahakai NHT. According to the EIS for the project,the NPS will prepare a fire management plan in coordination with appropriate State and County agencies. The plan will account for sensitive cultural resources and incorporate guidelines that assist fire personnel in the choice of procedures, tools, and equipment used in fire suppression and post-fire rehabilitation to help protect resources and land even during fire emergencies. SMA Permit 379 required the following: U • Condition 7: A mauka-makai road access of sufficient width to accommodate vehicle access —I 24 hours a day for drop off and pick up shall be provided along with the minimum 10-foot wide lateral public access walkway along the shoreline. The type of improvements and specific location of the walkway shall be determined at the time of subdivision approval 56 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LJ review. Further, a minimum of four on-site public parking stalls to serve the walkway shall be provided and clearly identified. A shoreline setback variance shall be secured for any improvements to the public access which will be within the 40-foot shoreline setback area. Construction of the public walkway and parking stalls shall be completed prior to issuance of any building permit for any structures. • Condition 8 (also Condition 0 of change of zone Ordinance No. 97-02): The applicant shall develop and submit a comprehensive public access plan for the subject property for review and approval to the Planning Director, in consultation with the Department of Land and Natural Resources (Na Ala Hele Trails Program), in conjunction with Final Subdivision Approval. The public access plan shall provide for mauka-makai and lateral shoreline Li pedestrian accessways,public parking stalls for users of the shoreline area, signage and restrictions on use(if any). Such public access improvements shall be completed prior to Final Subdivision Approval for any portion of the subject property. Although the project is far less and dense and impactful than the project for which these conditions were imposed, somewhat similar conditions requiring a public access plan and a parking lot at the Li northern entrance to the development are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use Permit and the rezoning ordinance that would grant the change of zone to RA-5a. The owner will request that the parking lot hours be from a half-hour before sunrise to a Ell half-hour after sunset. Throughout the history of the previous projects, some members of the public have requested vehicular access to the shoreline or parking lots closer to the shoreline; combining the public access with the Kohala Kai access to the south to get a wider access that could potentially','switchback" and achieve a lower grade; and 24-hour access. While support for the Ala Kahakai has been almost universal, some have been concerned that portions of the ala loa were too sensitive to be used. I Public access plans on any property planned for development must balance the needs of the public for reasonable access to and along the shoreline with interests of the landowner. The proposed access plan at Kohala Shoreline—with a parking lot and trail to allow users to park within the property and walk about 250 yards to the shoreline—would appear to be reasonable and typical of coastal developments in the region,which do not allow vehicles to park on the shoreline and instead require walking an access route that is open during daylight and dusk hours. Most of the major public accesses in North and South Kohala require walks of 200 to 400 yards. This includes Hapuna Beach State Park(280-455 yards),the Mauna Kea Beach Hotel (400-520 yards),Kohala Waterfront (270-290 yards), Kohala Kai (480 yards), and Lapakahi State Park(275 yards). The proposed plan would improve public access,which is a beneficial impact. Fl 3.2.3 Cultural Resources An archaeological inventory survey(AIS)report and cultural impact assessment(CIA)report for the proposed action were performed by ASM Affiliates, Inc. The CIA is included in this EA as Appendix 3, and the AIS is included as Appendix 4. In the interest of readability,the summary below,which also is derived from other sources,has eliminated most scholarly references;readers I. interested in sources may consult the appendices. 57 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Cultural and Historical Background The property is located in the ahupuaa of Kahud I'(Kahudli'ili'i) in the district of North Kohala. The concept of the ahupuaa was established in Hawaii during the 15'h century, adding a new component to what was already a well-stratified society.Ahupuaa were usually wedge or pie- shaped, encompassing all of the eco-zones from the mountains to the sea and extending several hundred yards beyond the shoreline, assuring a diverse subsistence resource base. This land unit became the equivalent of a local community,with its own social, economic and political identity. Ahupua'a.were ruled by ali'i 'ai ahupuaa or lesser chiefs and managed by a konohiki.Ali`i and maka'ainana, or commoners,were not confined to the boundaries of ahupuaa, as resources were Lq shared when a need was identified.Ahupuaa were further divided into smaller sections such as 'ili, mo'o'aina,paukuaina, kihapai, koele, hakuone and kuakua. The chiefs of these land units have their allegiance to a territorial chief or mo`i(often translated as king). According to the model developed by Kirch(1985) and later revised in terms of initial settlement date(Kirch 2011),the Settlement or Colonization period of Hawaii was around A.D. 1000,with colonists possibly from the southern Marquesas Islands. Early Hawaiian farmers developed new subsistence strategies during this period, adapting familiar patterns and traditional tools for use in their new environment. Order was kept through adherence to their ancient and ingrained philosophy of life and through the principle of genealogical seniority. According to Fornander(1969), Hawaiians brought from their homeland a variety of Polynesian customs including the major gods of Kane, Ku and Lono;the kapu system of law and order;puuhonua or places of refuge or asylum, the 'aumakua concept of a family or ancestral spirit and the concept of mana, or spiritual power. The Development Period,which lasted from A.D. 1100-1350,brought changes that included an evolution of traditional tools as well as some distinctly Hawaiian inventions. The evolution of the adze was an example of the former, while the latter included the two-piece fishhook and the octopus-lure breadloaf sinker. Another new article was the lei niho palaoa, an item worn by those of high rank which represented a trend toward greater status differentiation. The Expansion Period from A.D. 1350 to 1650 saw an increase in social stratification and major socioeconomic changes. It also was a time of expansive settling,with the development of the most favorable windward areas as well as more marginal areas on the island's leeward side. This was the U time of the greatest population growth as large irrigated field systems were developed and expanded into more and areas.Loko or fishpond aquaculture also flourished during this period. The second major migration to Hawaii also occurred during the Expansion Period,with the settlers for this expansion coming from Tahiti in the Society Islands. An increase in war marked the Proto-Historic Period(A.D. 1650-1795),both locally and between islands. Some of that warfare involved Kohala and the Kawaihae area. Shortly before this period, around 1600,the Maui chief Kamalalawalu sent spies to areas that included Kawaihae to gauge their population and how many warriors it would take to conquer the areas. According to one account: 58 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I ' : i W� The spies sent by Kama-lata-walu went to Hawaii and landed at Kawaihae in the evening. Ka-uhi-o-ka-lani ran about that same evening and returned before the canoes were dismantled and placed in the house. The keepers of the gods at `r Mailekini were servants of Kama, and so they concealed the canoes of the spies...[Kamakau 1992:56].. i However, during the spies' visit to Kohala,which according to Kamakau was a"thickly-populated J land,"they found many empty houses because most of the men were in upland areas taking part in sports competitions.Kamalalawalu's forces first defeated the residents they found in the northern ( part of Kohala but when they arrived at Kawaihae they again found empty houses because their W residents were attending services at Mailekini Heiau in Waimea. The grassy plains of Waimea soon became the setting for a battle between the Maui warriors and the forces of chiefs from Kohala, Waimea,Kona,Puna and Ka`u. The combined Hawai'i Island forces slew Kamalalawalu and many of his chiefs and warriors,with the remainder making their way back to Maui. North Kohala is also known as the birthplace of Kamehameha I,who was born in the ahupua`a of Kokoiki. It has been said that when he was born, an army was assembling on the leeward Kohala coast,preparing for an attack on Maui, and his birth occurred on a night filled with rain,thunder and lightning. Maui chief Kekaulike was involved at that time in a battle with Alapa`i of Kona. During iJ the conflict, Kekaulike's men cut down trees in Kona and, according to Kamakau, all of the coconut trees in Kawaihae. According to Kamakau,he also "slaughtered the country people of Kohala" before seizing their possessions and returning to Maui,where he soon became ill and surrendered U his power to Kamehamehanui. This period was one of continual war and strife. Ke`eaumoku set up a fort at Pololu and Honokane where he was attacked by Kalaniopu`u, and then relocated to Maui.Kalaniopu`u also conquered East Maui, defeating Kamehamehanui,who was Kekaulike's successor and also Kalaniopu`u's wife's brother. Kalaniopu`u appointed one of his chiefs,Puna,to be governor of Hana and Kipahulu. When Kamehamehanui died of illness in 1766,he was succeeded as Maui's king by Kahekili. At about that time,Ke`eamoku took Kamehamehanui's widow,Namahana,who was El Kamehamehanui's cousin, as his wife. Their daughter,Ka`ahumanu,who would eventually become the favorite wife of Kamehameha I,was born in a cave at the base of Pu`u Kau`iki in 1768. DjIn 1775, Kalaniopu`u and his forces from Hana overran the neighboring Kaupo district and raided Molokai, Lanai,Kaho`olawe and parts of West Maui. Kamehameha's efforts at the battle of Kalaeoka`ilio near Kaupo earned him recognition as a great warrior and the name of Pai`ea L (meaning hard-shelled crab) from Maui chiefs and warriors.Ka`ahumanu and her parents left Maui for Hawaii Island during the battles between Kalaniopu`u and Kahekili. In 1790 two Western ships,the Eleanora and Fair American,were trading in Hawaiian waters. As retribution for the theft of a skiff and the murder of one of the sailors,the crew of the Eleanora } massacred more than 100 natives at Olowalu,Maui. The Eleanora then sailed to Hawaii Island, and one of its crew,John Young, went ashore,where he was detained by Kamehameha. The other vessel,the Fair American, was captured by the forces of Kamehameha off the Kekaha coast and its - crew was killed except for one member, Isaac Davis. Kame`eiamoku, who resided in Ka`upulehu at l 59 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision the time,played a lead role in this incident. He and his followers recovered several foreign arms from the Fair American, including a cannon that they called"Lopaka", all of which were turned over to Kamehameha(Kamakau 1992). Kamehameha made Young and Davis his advisors.He also kept the vessel as part of his fleet. With the aid of his new advisors,new ship, and foreign arms Kamehameha conquered Maui, and by 1796 he had conquered all the island kingdoms except Kaua'i. It wasn't until 1810,when Kaumuali'i of Kaua'i gave his allegiance to Kamehameha,that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler, Kawaihae, located three miles south of the property, eventually became one of the royal centers of the island at which Kamehameha resided, and one where he could make use of trade with foreign ships to acquire guns and ammunition. It was also the site of Pu'ukohola Heiau, dedicated to the war god Kuka'ilimoku,which Kamehameha built on the advice of a soothsayer. Subjects came from across Kamehamelia's lands-by the thousands to help him build the heiau. When it was completed in 1791,Kamehameha sent for Keoua,ruler of Ka'U,who was then killed and placed within the heiau,thus cementing Kamehameha's rule over Hawaii Island. When in Kawaihae,Kamehameha stayed at Pelekane, located below Pu'ukohola. After his death in 1819, the royal residence consisted of multiple houses now occupied by his successor, Liholiho, also known as Kamehameha H. The missionary William Ellis observed 100 houses at Kawaihae in 1823, although it was unlikely that the area's dry climate supported enough agriculture to sustain the court and its entourage as well as the commoners living there. The Journal of a Trading Voyage L11 Around the World by an I. Iselin gave the following account of the Kawaihae area ca. 1806: This bay of Toeigh is very open; an extensive reef runs near it nearly level with the water, and altogether it is no inviting place to anchor at. The country around it looks like a hilly barren desert;nothing grows within ten miles of it, except a few cocoanut trees, of which a fine grove stands near the beach. The inhabitants and huts are thinly scattered along the shore, far less numerous than about [Kealakekua], and seem more indigent,indeed,having to go so far for their subsistence, they are not seldom in rr want of the supports of life. Kawaihae was described by Handy and Handy as surrounded by an and countryside: D The terrain immediately around [Kawaihae] is dry and barren but formerly much dry taro was grown beyond in the lower forest zone,which formerly extended from the Kohala Mountains much farther seaward over what is now open pasture land. Wet L) taro was grown also in small pockets of land wherever streams, even intermittent ones, flowed down from the mountains in the wet seasons. Ellis said the coast north of Kawaihae was similarly dry: The coast was barren;the rock volcanic. The inhabitants were all fishermen. Mr. E Thurston was informed,that the inhabitants of the plantations, about seven miles in the interiour,were far more numerous than those of the sea-shore. 60 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision f'^ I ✓u r-1 t ` �J jThe historian John Papa I`i noted that fishermen traded their wares for poi at Kawaihae: ..J Soon the fishing canoes from Kawaihae,the Kana lands, and Ooma, drew close to the ship to trade for the pa`i`ai (hard poi) carried on board, and shortly a great �. quantity of aku lay silvery-hued on the deck. The fishes were cut into pieces and mashed; and all those aboard fell to and ate,the women by themselves. jAccording to Ellis, salt was another product of the Kawaihae area: The natives of this district manufacture large quantities of salt,by evaporating the sea water. We saw a number of their pans, in the disposition of which they display great ingenuity. During this period there was a continuation of the trend toward intensification of agriculture, ali`i- controlled aquaculture, settling of upland areas and development of traditional of oral history. The j� Ku cult, luakini heiau and kapu system were at their peaks,but the influence of western civilization was being felt in the introduction of trade for profit and a market-system economy. By 1810,the sandalwood trade established by Europeans and Americans twenty years earlier was flourishing. (i That contributed to the breakdown of the traditional subsidence system, as farmers and fishermen U were required to toil at logging which resulted in food shortages and a decline in population. Following the death of Kamehameha I in 1819, the customary relaxing of kapu took place. But with the introduction of Christianity shortly thereafter,his successor, Kamehameha II,renounced the traditional religion and ordered that heiau structures either be destroyed or left to deteriorate. The family worship of aumakua images was allowed to continue. The Protestant missionaries who arrived from Boston in 1820 soon were rewarded with land and government positions, as many of the ali`i were eager to assimilate Western-style dress and culture. But at the same time,the continuing sandalwood trade was becoming a heavier burden on commoners, as Ellis noted: About eleven at night we reached Towaihae [Kawaihae],where we were kindly received by Mr. Young. ... Before daylight on the 22"d,we were roused by vast j multitudes of people passing through the district from Waimea with sandal-wood, which had been cut in the adjacent mountains for Karaimoku,by the people of Waimea, and which the people of Kohala, as far as the north point,had been ordered to bring down to his storehouse on the beach, for the purpose of its being shipped to Oahu. There were between two and three thousand men, carrying each from one to six i- pieces of sandal-wood, according to their size and weight. It was generally tied on their i backs by bands of ti leaves,passed over the shoulders and under the arms, and fastened across their breasts. U The rampant sandalwood trade resulted in the first Hawaiian national debt, as promissory notes and levies granted by American traders were enforced by American warships. The assimilation of —` 61 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I' R Western ways continued with the short-lived whaling industry and commercial sugarcane,which was more lucrative but carried a heavy environmental price. The remainder of the 19t"century saw significant changes in Kawaihae as the practice of trade led many to abandon traditional lifestyles. The result was a loss of population and resources, leaving one observer to describe the town as a"small dreary village"entirely lacking foliage except for"a few sickly cocoa-nut trees." Evidence of the earliest permanent settlement in Kohala was obtained from Koai'e,where a coastal settlement was believed to have existed as early as 1300. Inhabitants subsisted primarily on marine resources likely supplemented by small-scale agriculture. Rosendahl (1972)proposed that early settlers of the area focused on fishing and other ocean-related activities during the summer and farming at upland sites during the winter. As early as the 1830s,missionaries were noting population changes in Kohala, as deaths were outpacing births. An 1835 census showed the combined population of Kahud 1St and 2nd to be 265. But only 11 years later, during the Mdhele,there was only a single person making a kuleana claim (small awards to commoners) in Kalmanui. The Mahele 'Aina that took place in 1848 placed all land in Hawaii into three categories: Crown Lands, Government Lands and Konohiki Lands. Ownership rights were"subject to the rights of the native tenants,"or those individuals who lived on the land and worked it for their subsistence and for their chiefs. The leeward North Kohala coast south of Mo'okini Heiau has few known heiau; only three paved structures with large rock fill at Kukuipahu fit the descriptions. However, additional work and closer scrutiny of stone platforms on crests of rises,that are sometimes associated with walled precincts, could reveal more heiau along the coastal settlements. The narrow band of habitation settlements along the coast are separated from a broader upland band of agricultural walls and habitations by a barren zone with relatively few archaeological sites. Within individual ahupuaa, trails that pass through the barren zone would have connected coastal settlements with upland fields. The width of the barren zone is inversely related to the abundance of rainfall; in the wetter north near 'Upolu Point it is about half a mile wide, and it widens to three miles in the drier south at Kahud.,Surveys that have covered the uplands away from the coastline date back to the late 1960s when the University of Hawaii field schools mapped Lapakahi Ahupua'alnorth of Ka'iholena Ahupua'a,using aerial photographs and surveying instruments. Vast portions of Kahud I'and 2nd inland of the highway were surveyed by Harnmatt and Borthwick(1986, 1987, 1990). During these upland surveys,which covered land up to the 3,000-foot elevation, archaeologists found trail markers, scattered agricultural terraces,temporary habitation shelters, and rock walls. The remains F1 most probably relate to the upland agricultural fields mentioned in various oral and written histories. U 62 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U li W The ahupua`a of Kahuali`ili`i (also known as Kahua 15)where the property is located was awarded to Lot Kapuaiwa(Kamehameha V). However,hearings held by the Boundary Commission of the Kingdom of Hawaii to determine the boundaries of Kahuali`ilN were not held until 1873,the year following Lot Kapuaiwa's death, and the ahupua a apparently became part of the estate of his father, M. Kekuanao`a. The boundaries were not officially established until 1903,by which time the ahupua a had been acquired by James Woods. There were no kuleana awarded in what is now the property. Woods started Pu`u Hue Ranch in the early 1870s. Upon his death the ranching operations were taken over by his son,Frank Woods. By the 1920s, Woods was leasing much of the Kahua lands to i former Oahu residents Ronald Kamehameha o Ka Hae Hawaii von Holt and Herbert Montague Richards, Sr. By 1928, von Holt and Richards had purchased the lands they formerly leased, and they began combining them with land from the Waika Ahupua`a to the south. Through purchases and leases,they eventually accumulated nearly 30,000 acres which became known as Kahua Ranch. Von Holt died in 1953, and control of the ranch eventually passed to Herbert"Monty"Richards, Jr. j In the 1980s, the ranch was divided between the two families,with the Richards operating Kahua LJ Ranch and the von Holts controlling the southern portion that formed Ponoholo Ranch. Kahua } Ranch sold the land that now makes up the property. u Because of its and nature,the Kawaihae area was not highly populated until visits by trade and whaling ships made the bay a frequent port of call. There were no regularly flowing streams to support agriculture,which instead took place far inland. The economy of Kawaihae received a boost from the introduction of cattle ranching. Cattle from Waimea were brought to Kawaihae via a road built in 1830 and held in pens for the trip to Oahu on cattle boats. The trade in hides and meat also helped turn Kawaihae into a major port. The Pacific Commercial Advertiser reported up to 50 whaling ships making a port call in Kawaihae in 1857. An 1883 map showed Kawaihae with a lighthouse,wool shed,native store,jail, boat house, church and other buildings that were likely houses. Twenty years later, a plant had been built to manufacture soap from cattle tallow. Kawaihae continued to host harbor activities, and in 1959 a new deep-draft harbor was built by the federal government. However, deposits from dredging of the shallow reef buried Kawaihae Village, its salt pans,the Kauhuhue Heiau and the majority of the coastal Land Commission awards up to 13 feet deep. Additional development in 1969 and 1970 further transformed the area into an industrial i park. Cultural Studies in Project Area Maria E. Ka`imipono Orr(2003)prepared a cultural impact assessment for a proposed radio communication tower and facility to be placed on Pu`u Waiakanonula in the mauka portion of Kahuali`ili`i.Her study included a detailed culture-historical background for the ahupua`a. She also ' conducted interviews with Sherri Hannum, Genevieve Leina`ala Hoopai,Bernard Hoopai,Bernelle Hoopai,Harold Glenn Kailiawa,Hannah Springer, and Harry Martens (Pono)von Holt 11. Off (2003) concluded that no cultural properties or practices would be affected by the project,but 63 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LI cautioned that"for over a hundred years,native Hawaiians have lived in a culturally repressed state. It has been only within the last thirty years, due to evolved awareness,that native Hawaiians have been aggressively trying to reclaim their wahipana(sacred and/or legendary places)." Kepa Maly prepared a detailed culture-historical background for Ka'iholena Ahupua'a(Maly 2000) that included information relative to the general region known as Kohala Waho or Outer Kohala, of which the property is a part. Maly's (2000) extensive culture-historical information suggests that the archaeological resources present on the property are best understood within the context of the larger cultural landscape of Kohala Waho; a landscape with a long history,rich in cultural traditions. One could conclude from this that the significance of any one resource is enhanced by the presence of other resources, and together form a cohesive landscape that should be treated and managed in its totality. In 2006,Rechtman Consulting prepared cultural impact assessment for a coastal property within Kahudnui and Waika ahupuaa adjoining the property to the south(Rechtman 2006). That property and the Kohala Shoreline property share a common history and were subject to similar land uses dating back to the Precontact settlement of the area. As part of the study, William AhYou Akau, Jr., Herbert Montague(Monty)Richards Jr., and Harry Martens (Pond)von Holt 11 were interviewed. Rechtman (2006) concluded that if the archaeological sites were treated in accordance with State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD) approved treatment plans, and access to and along the shoreline was in no way inhibited, there would be no cultural impacts. In 2004,Rechtman Consulting prepared a cultural impact assessment(Rechtman 2004) for a small coastal parcel within Pdo'o Ahupua'a, some six miles north of the current project area. Interviewees for that study included Arthur Mahi, Isabella Mahi Medeiros, and Valerie Luhiau Ako. Collectively, the primary concerns of these individuals (all with cultural ties to the study ahupua'a)revolved around the protection of the archaeological resources and the maintenance of access to the shoreline. The relevance of this study for the Kohala Shoreline project is not so much the specifics of Pdo'o Ahupua'a,but rather the general concept that the land needs to be cared for in appropriate ways; the concept of malama 'dina. This Pdo'o project required a Conservation District Use Permit, the proceedings for which included oral and written testimony. Most of that testimony revolved around specific resources located on the Pqo'o parcel,but there was other testimony of a more general nature that had broader implications that should be considered when assessing cultural impacts along this portion of the Kohala coastline. These included the concepts of malama 'dina, as well as cultural trauma and cultural disintegration fostering multigenerational psychopathologies. Several of those who testified suggested that home construction in currently undeveloped portions of coastal Kohala would be inconsistent with the traditional cultural practice of caring for the land(malama 'dina), although no basis for this assertion was cited. It should be noted that the property was utilized by generations of Hawaiians as a place of habitation, as evidenced by the numerous structural remains of residential complexes across the property. Testimony presented by Kamana'opono Crabbe,Ph.D. and Dr. David Liu in relation to Pdo'o with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma distinguished traditional Hawaiian use of land and modem Western use of land. There are those who assert that all land in 64 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I ' II Hawaii is a cultural resource and that virtually all modern development(as opposed to traditional uses)has a severe and unmitigable cultural impact. Section 3.2.4 discusses archaeological resources in detail. While various Precontact and Historic-era archaeological sites not considered significant for preservation by SHPD are present, such features are relatively common in the area and they do not appear to have cultural value aside from their value for interpreting historic patterns. However, there are features that have greater historic value �i requiring preservation, including burials and several other sites associated with habitation. Beyond their scientific-historic value,they also have cultural value. _J Consultation When assessing potential cultural impacts to resources,practices, and beliefs, input gathered from community members with genealogical ties and/or long-standing residency relationships to the study area is vital. It is precisely these individuals who ascribe meaning and value to traditional resources and practices. Community members may also retain traditional knowledge and beliefs unavailable elsewhere in the historical or cultural record of a place. Extensive consultation with Native Hawaiian agencies, individuals and organizations occurred throughout the research for the withdrawn 2015 Draft EA(Kohala Shoreline LLC 2015), a process that continued in 2018 for the preparation of this EA. The Office of Hawaiian Affairs in Honolulu and West Hawaii, a local Hawaiian Home Lands group, and the Hawaiian Civic Club were consulted by letter on January 10,2010,to determine whether they had any information concerning whether cultural resources or practices might nevertheless be present. Response letters did not indicate any specific resources or practices of concern. After a hiatus in the earlier project, consultation resumed in 2014. As part of the CIA, author Robert EllRechtman,Ph.D., and project representatives met with the North Kohala Community Access Group (with whom project representatives had also met in 2010). Although this group's membership is multicultural,they represent many of the Native Hawaiian community's concerns with respect to access rights, and they were a forum to disseminate information about the project within the Native Hawaiian community and to invite comments on potential resources and impacts related to the property. The South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Kailapa Community Association were also contacted. As a result of these contacts and communications, a field visit was set up with the intention of viewing the property and discussing any potential cultural impacts. On November 15, 2014, and January 31, 2015,Dr. Rechtman met on-site with several members of the North Kohala Community Access Group,the South Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee, and residents of the Kailapa Homesteads. According to Dr. Rechtman's account of the first meeting, one attendee claimed ownership of the property and advised that none of the group had permission to enter the property. In the interest of avoiding conflict,the group decided not to visit the property. To date,there has been no legal action filed in court by any party to assert ownership to, or any interest in the property. Also present at the r, aborted meeting was Kaena Peterson,who is kama`dina to the area, a resident of Kailapa, and 65 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club. Ms. Peterson was contacted the following day and she requested Dr. Rechtman to meet with her and the Vice President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club to share information about the project and hear their concerns. On November 23,2014,Dr. Rechtman met with Ms. Peterson and Lei Kihoi of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club at the Kailapa residence of Ms. Peterson. Their concerns related to the protection of trails, other traditional sites and burial sites, as well as perpetuation of access to the property for traditional and customary practices. With respect to the former,they wanted all burial sites properly treated and for traditional trail routes to remain open for unrestricted pedestrian access. With respect to the perpetuation of traditional and customary practices they wanted to make sure that traditional coastal activities were not impacted, and that Native Hawaiian individuals and organized groups such as hula halau had unrestricted access to the trails and shoreline. Both Ms. Peterson and Ms. Kihoi stressed the importance of maintaining the traditional access routes that exist on the landscape. During the second field trip conducted with members of the North Kohala Community Access Group and residents of the Kailapa Homestead in January 2015,much of the discussion revolved around trails and access. Present during this visit was Jejo Tanimoto, a kupuna of Native Hawaiian ancestry. She shared recollections of traveling the project area coastline for shoreline fishing activities with her father when she was a child.Ms. Tanimoto also talked about a shoreline pond in the general area that William Akau told her was culturally significant,but she was unsure of its exact location. Also present during this visit was Ms. Kaneali'i and Parish Canon of the Kailapa Homestead. Mr. Canon, a younger generation Native Hawaiian and current president of the Kailapa Community Association, expressed an interest in having community members take an active role in thepreservation of cultural sites and resources within the development area. At this point,the former Draft EA was published in the July 8, 2015 edition of The Environmental Notice. As stated previously,the project team received many comments on the Draft EA with concerns including density, lot configuration,public access,historic sites, cultural practices, drainage and water quality. The owner carefully considered the comments and decided not to LI implement the project as proposed and instead completely redesigned it to respond to these concerns. The former Draft EA was formally withdrawn, and the current project was developed, with a much lower density and all building sites moved completely mauka of the ala loa, away from the shoreline. As explained in detail the next section,many more archaeological sites that were formerly slated for data recovery will now be formally preserved. Given the substantial changes,the cultural impact assessment team conducted additional consultation. This consisted of phone calls, emails and letters, and also public notices soliciting consultation for the burial sites that were published in the July 2018 issue of Ka Wai Ola o OHA on June 16, July 1,July 4, 2018 in both the Honolulu Star Advertiser and West Hawaii Today newspapers. The following individuals and organizations were specifically coordinated with. Kailqpa Community Association. Diane Maka'ala Kaneali'i was contacted via email (on November 2 and 26, and December 8 and 10, 2018) in her capacity as Executive Director of the Kailapa Community Association. The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her U and a request was made to make a presentation at a community association meeting. An 66 U Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision arrangement was then made to facilitate an early February.2019 on-site meeting with representatives of the Kailapa Community Association and other community members. On February 2, 2019, Robert B. Rechtman,Ph.D. conducted a walking tour of the proposed subdivision area with Diane Maka'ala Kaneali'i and Cynthia Sharp.Ms. Sham is also a IJ board member of the Kailapa Community Association. Both Ms. Kdneali'i and Ms. Sham expressed pleasure that the extreme coastal portion of the property will be preserved but indicated that the best approach would be to preserve the whole property through a land purchase perhaps using County Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission(PONC) funds. Short of this happening,both were encouraged by the overall limited space available for future development. Ms. kdneali'i indicated that she would work with the owner to help establish a community stewardship program that could participate in the preservation of the cultural landscape, conduct coastal clean-up, and help restore and protect archaeological resources. The owner has stated that it is committed to J continued consultation with this and any other Kohala cultural community groups with respect to the long-term protection and care of the project area's cultural landscape, and the Kailapa Community Association will be further consulted with respect to the archaeological preservation plan. Hawaii Island Burial Council(HIBC).Dr. Rechtman appeared before the HIBC on November 5, 2018 to conduct preliminary consultation with respect to the five burial sites within the development area, and he related to the Council members that there were no responses to the public notices. The existing treatment plan(PHRI 2000) for four of those sites was discussed and it was explained that a fifth site had been discovered as a result of the updated AIS (Rechtman and Clark 2010). It was also explained that the existing HIBC- Ell approved 20-foot buffers for the sites would be increased to 30 feet in the new Burial Treatment Plan(BTP). Council members were pleased with the increased buffer size and were interested in ensuring that appropriate access to the burial sites would be allowed. Provisions for such access will be included in the forthcoming BTP. Kaena Peterson. Kaena Peterson lives in the Kailapa(Honokoa) Community and serves as FI, the President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club. She was consulted during the earlier L iteration of the project. Ms'. Peterson was contacted again via email (on October 30 and December 8, 2018). The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her and a request was made to make a presentation at a Civic Club meeting. Scheduling could not accommodate such a presentation,however, in a phone conversation(on December 11)Ms. Peterson shared that she was happy to see all development activity moved to the mauka side of the ala loa. She also strongly urged the owner to keep the current six-lot plan and not change it later to higher density and make sure that future homeowners would not encroach on the trails,which to her are at the heart of cultural practice. Ms. Peterson related that the uniqueness of living on an island comes with a kuleana toward fellow residents, something she believes was a part of traditional Hawaiian culture. Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail.Further brief consultation was conducted with Rick Gmirkin of the National Park Service's Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program. The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared via email and a brief phone conversation(on 67 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision December 10, 2018)was conducted. Mr. Gmirkin expressed approval that there will be no breaches of the ala loa and that the public access to the ala loa will follow along an existing traditional mauka/makai trail alignment. He was also encouraged that the new subdivision configuration supported the preservation of more of the archaeological landscape, as this helps provide the context for the Ala Kahakai. The owner will continue to consult with the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program to fine-tune the public alignment of the Ala Kahakai in order to include features of the trail important for public use and enjoyment, as well as exclude certain significant features (e.g.,burial sites) from public interaction. FJ Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OM. Shane Nelson of OHA's West Hawaii office was contacted via email (on September 12 and October 30,2018)and a phone conversation was arranged for November 5,2018. The reduced-lot development plan was shared with Shane and he expressed his pleasure that the proposed development would have less of an impact n on the cultural landscape and the archaeological sites contained therein. Shane requested U continued consultation with OHA when the burial treatment and archaeological preservation plans become available. North Kohala Community Access Group. On January 9, 2019,Dr. Rechtman accompanied the project planner and environmental scientist to a regularly scheduled meeting of the NKCAG. The purpose was primarily to explain in detail the significant changes in project design and to take input concerning public access. Impacts and Mitigation Measures: Cultural Resources and Practices The Constitution of the State of Hawaii clearly states the duty of the State and its agencies to preserve,protect, and prevent interference with the traditional and customary rights of native Hawaiians.Article XII, Section 7 requires the State to "protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupuaa tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778."In spite of the establishment of the foreign concept of private ownership and Western-style government,Kamehameha III(Kauikeaouli)preserved the people's traditional right to subsistence. As a result, in 1850 the Hawaiian Government confirmed the traditional access rights to native Hawaiian ahupuaa tenants to gather specific natural resources for customary uses from undeveloped private property and waterways under the Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) 7-1. In 1992,the State of Hawaii Supreme Court reaffirmed HRS 7-1 and ruled that, "native Hawaiian rights...may extend beyond the ahupuaa in which a native Hawaiian resides where such rights been customarily and traditionally exercised in this manner" (Pete Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Dhave Haw.578, 1992). The duty of agencies when granting land use permits to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources, assess impacts to them and devise feasible actions to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights was established by the Hawaii Supreme Court in the case of Ka U Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs. the Hawaii State Land Use Commission(94 Hawaii 31, 7 P.3d 106, 2000). To assist in consideration of cultural resources and their impacts during the EA/EIS process,the U Hawaii State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) developed the Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts (jtt p://health.hawaii.goy/oeqc/). The types of cultural practices and 68 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision beliefs subject to assessment may include subsistence, commercial,residential, agricultural, access- related,recreational, and religious and spiritual customs. A cultural impact assessment must evaluate the probability of impacts on identified cultural resources, including values,rights,beliefs, objects,records,properties, and stories occurring within the project area and its vicinity. As part of the effort to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources,the physical resources of the Kohala Shoreline property, such as plants and water features,were assessed. In general, it was observed that no culturally important native vegetation, springs, groves of native trees, caves or puu, all of which may have cultural significance, are present on the property. The vegetation of almost the entire property, and all areas potentially affected by construction, is heavily U, disturbed, alien kiawe forest with buffel grass, as discussed in Section 3.1.4, above. Of critical importance,however, is the value of the shoreline and its resources, and the related issue of access. These need,to be maintained in as pristine a condition as possible for the sustenance,both physical and cultural,that they provide. In addition to natural resources that are important in cultural practice,the property supports burials and archaeological features that have cultural significance. Potential impacts to these cultural resources and associated practices can be largely avoided or at least greatly reduced by appropriate mitigation. The strategies for implementing this are discussed below. Mitigation for Cultural Impacts to Burials and Archaeological Sites. To avoid potential impacts to the cultural value of burial sites present on the property, a burial treatment plan will be prepared in compliance with HAR §13-300. To avoid potential adverse impacts to the cultural value of the preservation sites, and to enhance the preservation, interpretive and cultural values of these sites, an archaeological preservation plan will be prepared.As explained in more detail in the next section, I I archaeological sites will be reassigned a preservation treatment, increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen to 27. Both plans will be implemented prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities. Throughout this process,native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. These actions must also be implemented prior to any ground-disturbing activities. To mitigate the potential impacts to the cultural value of the other archaeological sites on the property, a data recovery plan will be prepared and implemented in compliance with laws and regulations governing historic sites in the State of Hawaii. Mitigation for Cultural Impacts to Shoreline Access,Resources and Gathering. The shoreline area of the property is a valued natural/cultural resource because, among other attributes, it provides access to marine resources and practices. Within the local community these lands are known to have been privately held for over 100 years, with access to the shoreline for traditional cultural practices that has never been prohibited but may have been more difficult because of a lack of parking and improved trails. Based on extensive community consultation,the project has been modified over the decades to a plan that now proposes no development from the shoreline to the ala loaljeep road, a distance that varies from 40 to 300 feet(generally over 125 feet),partly in order to protect these practices. Also, in the spirit of mdlama 'dina, current development plans call for a down-zoning from the current zoning of Single-Family Residential 15,000-square foot minimum lot size to 69 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Residential and Agricultural 5-acre minimum lot size. The plan would locate building sites away from the shoreline,with low densities and buffers that can preserve a significant FI portion of the archaeological and cultural landscape. Improved and clearly marked access with the support of the owner will promote continuing and expanded traditional use of the shoreline. In a general sense, access to and use of the shoreline area of the property for recreational, subsistence,transportation, and spiritual purposes can be considered an ancient, as well as ongoing practice, and it is thus a valued cultural resource. The primary concern raised by one consulted party in a previous assessment(William Akau)was that of maintaining lateral pedestrian access for fishing, transportation, and recreation. He has long been an advocate for the perpetuation of Hawaiian rights of access to, and use of,the traditional system of trails. As discussed in Section 3.2.2, above, old maps indicate that the land was crossed by a coastal trail or ala loa, n parts of which eventually became the coastal jeep road. The extensive trail amenities proposed for the project discussed in Section 3.2.2,which include a pedestrian lateral shoreline trail, a mauka/makai pedestrian trail, and a public parking area,will facilitate coastal access and the continued use of the shoreline for recreational, subsistence, transportation, and spiritual purposes,thus alleviating any potential impacts related to shoreline access and cultural use. Steps like these that help promote access to the shoreline help mitigate the potential detrimental psychosocial effects mentioned above(and discussed in more detail in Appendix 3)with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma. Although the shoreline vegetation does not currently include the quality and quantity of botanical resources that would be important for native gathering, leeward areas such as the property formerly supported a number of culturally important littoral (near-shoreline)plants. Accordingly,the area makai of the ala loaJeep road is planned for gradual planting with native shoreline plants that could have cultural value,both simply by their restored presence and also as gathering resources. With the expected decrease in erosion, fire frequency and goat grazing, along with at least a minimal degree of care,these plants can become re- established and set an example for restoring traditionally important plants in the State and County public land properties to the north. In summary,the implementation of the above described measures relative to the identified archaeological sites,public access, cultural resources, and cultural practices and beliefs will help to minimize impacts to such resources,practices, or beliefs by the proposed development of the property. The pedestrian public access easements (which will be dedicated to the County of Hawaii)will allow the perpetuation of access to cultural resources for traditional and customary practices. The native plants planned for reintroduction in the area makai of the ala loa/jeep road as part of the owner's landscape concept can be utilized for native gathering. In addition, continued coordination on the part of the owner and future residents with members of the local Native Hawaiian community is encouraged.Allowing these knowledgeable and committed residents to participate in the preservation of resources within the development area and maintain an on-going dialog with the current and future lot owners would serve both cultural resources and community harmony. 70 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision ii The Draft EA was distributed to agencies and groups who might have knowledge concerning cultural resources in order to confirm the findings. Several parties commented with concerns that archaeological County Cultural Resources sites must be appropriately treated(see letters from the Fj Commission and the National Park Service's Ala Kahakai NHT in Appendix lb). The State Historic Preservation Division has concluded that all sites have been appropriately documented and the next sio, if the proposed six lot development isapproved pLoved by an SMA Use Permit and a Change of—Zone .- =roval,-is to complete Preservation and Burial Treatment Plans.which will help ensure protection. As explained in the response letter in Appendix lb,based on definitions of—cultural resources and practices,.the cultural impact assessment specialist for the.project does not concur with Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana—K hala Ao that vehicular access b North Ko �o's contention residents is a cultural practice that would be restricted by the proposed subdivision. Several parties expressed the idea that a more culturally = etable option for use of the property would be to have — ace —rty it purchased for open.space by the PONC Rind. Although recreational use of the propgr-�tmigh—t be marginally increased by public ownership, all cultural uses that public use would allow—fishing,, shoreline gathering, implementation of the Ala Kahakai Trail and associated access, and plant gathering—would essentially be accomplished by the development option as well. In addition, development will fund the pr —implementation of costly archaeological Pres preparation and Preservation and Burial Treatment Plans,which otherwise would require public funds. U— on.considerationof comments received,the conclusion isthatthe prpiect,which has been designed to avoid cultural Fit impacts and promote.cultural uses,would not adverselyfeet cultural resources or ices. -af practices. Archaeological Resources An archaeological inventory survey report addressing all archaeological sites on the property was performed by ASM Affiliates. The report was finalized in January 2016 and approved by the State Historic Preservation Division in February 2016. The AIS is an update on an earlier survey prepared for a different project plan by Graves and Franklin in 1998. Because the previous AIS was predicated on the construction of only one residence on the property and had incompletely recorded certain sites, an updated survey was required. The 2016 survey is included in Appendix 4,which begins with the February 8, 2016 letter approving the AIS, and a December 8,2018 letter to the SHPD with revised treatment recommendations based on a reduced development footprint,which will allow preservation rather than data recovery for certain sites. At least eight archaeological studies of the property have been conducted since 1985,when M. Allen carried out a pair of limited archaeological reconnaissance surveys. Others include a data (-,, recovery plan for one archaeological site(Rosendahl 1994), an archaeological inventory survey (Graves and Franklin 1998), and data recovery excavations (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999). Burial and site preservation plans were also prepared(PMU 2000), followed by additional testing of burial features in 2005. Other archaeological studies performed in the area of the property include three conducted in 1964 (Soehren), and 1968 (Bonk). Beginning in 2010, initial fieldwork for the current archaeological inventory survey by Rechtman Consulting(the predecessor to ASM Affiliates, Inc.),was conducted, followed by additional survey, subsurface testing at selected features, and further review of historic maps. The work identified all of the 39 archaeological sites previously recorded and refined the site descriptions for five of those 71 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LI sites. The latter included a corrected location and characterization of Feature D at Site 2496, a previously unrecorded rock shelter feature at Site 4013, a previously unrecorded rough terrace feature at Site 161331, an unrecorded northern extension of Site 16147, and an unrecorded marine shell scatter at Site 16151. Additionally, a portion of the previously undocumented Site 29271 —the ala loa coastal trail/Jeep road, commonly labeled the"Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail" on maps produced prior to 1931 —was recorded across the property. The 40 archaeological sites are mapped in Figure 10 and summarized in Table 6. Impacts and Mitigation Measures As a result of the current AIS,the original significance evaluation made by Graves and Franklin in 1998 and adopted in the subsequent DLNR-SHPD determiation(DOC NO.: 9805PM21)has been recommended for modification for five of the previously recorded sites. Four of these(Sites 4000, 4010, 16132, and 16138)were not considered to be significant in the original study;however, all these sites are part of a relatively intact archaeological landscape that documents evolving land use from Precontact times to the late Historic Period. As such, all four of these sites are now considered to be significant under Criterion D for their information content. Further, Site 2496 was originally determined to be significant solely under Criterion D; however, as this site is now known to contain a burial, it should also be considered significant under Criterion E. When the 2015 nine-lot subdivision was proposed, site treatments were reconsidered and plans were made to revise existing data recovery,preservation and burial treatment plans. With the reduction of the proposal to six lots, with no development makai of the ala loa/jeep road,recommended treatments have been further revised, and future data recovery,preservation and burial treatment plans will be further updated. The four previously identified burial sites (Sites 4004, 4013, 16148, and 16162) shall continue to be preserved. In conformance with the recommendation of the latest archaeological inventory survey, the burial treatment plan(PHRI 2000a)will be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use and the newly identified burial site(Site 2496 Feature D). The 2000 burial plan had noted that any subsequent change in the project's components could require that the applicant return to the Hawaii Island Burial Council for review of proposed preservation measures. The 2016 AIS recommended data recovery for 16 sites,plus portions of two additional sites (2496 and 4013)that contain preserved burial features. All those sites were previously approved for data recovery based on the Graves and Franklin survey with the exception of Sites 4010 and 16138, which were earlier approved for no further work. It is believed that these two sites still retain information that could be recovered and aid in developing a specific chronology of land-use history for the project area. As noted in Table 6 above, eleven archaeological sites (SHIP Sites 2496, 4010, 4012, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146, 16151, and 16167)that have been previously approved for data recovery by DLNR-SHPD will be reassigned a preservation treatment,reducing the total number of sites that will be subject to data recovery from eighteen to seven and increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen to twenty-seven. Pursuant to HAR 13-278, a plan addressing the data recovery of the seven sites will be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and approval. 72 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision It �1 Figure 10. Archaeological Sites _ — Seasonal drainage 0 40 80 1 1 i = -; Existing dirt roads Scale in Meters r C / Archaeological features N El `ne Burial features in red old Maltuk as-K-m\oiler:: (Teed)Trail in solid blue trails represented l4' i dashed bloc 1i11ts} f"f'i tf,t Yy !r'f3 Bulldozed area - r 4a13A 09 16135 r10 A` i s 401i`,`� i 1616 r $ B 4075 r• a��� Qa1fd� rte_�,,.,-�,� t ; rj' f14 1637 rr, ;,11261-13t x161162 f 16133r 16136 B 1613 4 D E !6158 `R' i s+41 Ell 400) A 400-1 Terrace not mentioned � X4271-t 11 in site description Dist r n'. r ' +"4�xCil 04 16148 R,,I a 1 i 24980 n Petr nly}1�'E�OA «' 16149 t 14 '"` 16139 A. 4000 1 16148 - - 'J ,,•"� ,,' [;ole 1 Pacific Ocean X14 r ,-_ i• Y' A 249 U rr�i Lill' IN4$ ~+J r r71fi4 — _ 114a 1r 41 r Ell, Marine shell scatter and alignmen r 1 [fila not mentioned in site description tbS4�i ''�"k 43 161 „ r' r 1615113 Cu� Ifil�il 16142 Marine shell scatter not mentioned in site description Note:Map notes indicate features not noted in surveys prior to 2010 ( . 73 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision i-, FJ P-I Table 5. Archaeological Sites SIHP Site Type Age Significance Recommended Treatment Site No. 2496 Habitation/Burial P D,E* Preservation/Burial Preservation 2498 Habitation/Ceremonial P C,D,E Preservation 2499 Habitation PIH C,D Preservation 4000 Wall PIH D** Preservation 4002 Rock Mound P D Data Recovery FJ 4003 Habitation PIH D Data Recovery 4004 Burial P/H D,E Burial Preservation 4005 Habitation PIH C,D Preservation Animal Enclosure H D** Preservation F14010 4011 Habitation PIH D Preservation 4012 Habitation PIH D Preservation 4013 Habitation/Burial PIH D,E Data Recove 1 Burial Preservation 4015 Habitation P D Data Recove Completed 15261 Trail PIH D,E No Further Work 16131 Habitation PIH D Preservation - 16132 Wall H D** No Further Work 16133 Well/Reservoir H D Preservation 16134 Enclosure H D Preservation 16135 Wall P D Data Recovery 16136 Habitation P D No Further Work 16137 Rock Mound P D Data Recovery 16138 Platform and Cairn P D** Preservation 16139 Habitation P D Preservation 16140 Habitation P D Preservation 16141 Habitation P D Preservation 16142 Habitation P D Preservation 16143 Habitation P D Preservation - 16144 Habitation P D Preservation - 16145 Habitation P D Preservation - 16146 Habitation P D Preservation 16147 Habitation P D Preservation - 16148 Habitation/Burial P D,E Burial Preservation - 16149 Habitation P D Preservation - 16150 Habitation P D Data Recovery 16151 Habitation P D Preservation - 16162 Burial P D,E Burial Preservation 16163 Habitation P D Preservation 16164 Habitation P D Data Recovery - 16167 A cultural Terrace PIH D Preservation - 29271 Trail I PIH D,E Preservation"* Age:P—Precontact;H—Historic.Significance Criteria:A-Associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history;B-Associated with the lives of persons important in our past;C- Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period or method of construction;represent the work of a master;or possess high artistic value;D-Have yielded,or be likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history;E-Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to 74 UUU Environmental Assessment Ko hala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LJ n associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts,these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity.*Criterion E added because a burial was found at this site during the current study. **These sites are considered significant under Criterion D in the current study;they were determined to not be significant in the earlier inventory. ***In conformance with standard treatments for linear features such as trails,roads and certain walls,the preservation plan for the trail will accommodate breaches for the mauka-makai public access trail. ` Preservation is now recommended for 27 sites, all but one of which(Site 4000)was approved for data recovery based on the original inventory survey. A new preservation plan that addresses these 27 sites will be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and compliance. n SHPD approved the AIS for the project per letter of February 6, 2016 (see Appendix 4). The project archaeologist wrote SHPD on December S,2018,with revised treatment recommendations based on t a reduced development footprint, which will allow preservation rather than data recovery for certain sites (see Appendix 4). By letter of June 3, 2019. SHPD agreed to revision of the mitigation commitment from data recovery to preservation for these sites (see Appendix 4). In addition to development and implementation of data recovery, preservation and burial treatment plans,the project has involved continuing consultation with native Hawaiian individuals and organizations, as discussed in the previous section. Continued consultation with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs will occur with respect to all archaeological sites determined significant under Criterion e. V F�� SMA 379 and Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following: I ' U • SMA Condition 10 and Rezoning Ordinance Condition M: A Data Recovery Plan and Preservation Plan shall be prepared for the review and approval by the Planning Director in consultation with the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division(DLNR-HPD). Proposed mitigation treatment(preservation in place or Disinterment-reinterment) for burial sites must be approved by the Historic Preservation i Division's Hawaii Island Burial Council before detailed mitigation plans are finalized for these sites.A copy of the approved Final Data Recovery Plan and Preservation Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director for its files prior to submitting plans for subdivision review and prior to any approval for any land alteration permits. • SMA Condition 11 and Rezoning Ordinance Condition N: Should any remains of historic F sites, such as rock walls,terraces,platforms,marine shell concentrations or human burials, il L be encountered,work in the immediate area shall cease and the Department of Land and Natural Resources-Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) shall be immediately notified. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from the SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigative measures have been taken. Similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Special Management Area Use L Permit and the Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a,which can help mitigate any impacts to archaeological and cultural resources of the property. It should be noted that extensive consultation has occurred, and is slated to continue to occur,throughout this project's development. S` 75 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision 3.3 Infrastructure 1 3.3.1 Utilities,Energy,Public Facilities and Public Services Existing Utilities, Impacts and Mitigation Measures Electrical power would be supplied to the project area by Hawaii Electric Light, a privately-owned utility company regulated by the State Public Utilities Commission,via its island-wide distribution Q network. In the project area the network utilizes overhead lines in a utility easement that runs parallel to and approximately 2,000 feet east(mauka) of Akoni Pule Highway. Telephone service is (� available from Hawaiian Telcom, also located in the utility easement.Underground connections to those utilities will be established for the project, similar to those utilized in the Kohala Ranch and Kohala Estates subdivisions located to the east and southeast. Water will be provided to the project under an agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company through a 12-inch water line along Akoni Pule Highway fronting the site. Storage in the Kohala (� Ranch Water system is provided by an existing 500,000-gallon storage reservoir located l S approximately 1,400 feet east of the property. This tank is sufficient to meet domestic and fire protection requirements for the project. Six-inch water lines will be installed at two locations along Akoni Pule Highway to provide water for the project's homes and fire hydrants. The capacity of the private system is adequate to accommodate the additional demand to serve the project's six lots, which is expected to be a maximum of 1,000 gallons per day. CC&Rs will require that the homes feature low-water fixtures and use roof-runoff for irrigation, as well as low-water-use landscaping, which is also in keeping with the natural vegetation of this part of Kohala. No municipal wastewater treatment service is available in Kohala. Homes will utilize individual wastewater treatment systems meeting with the requirements of the State Department of Health at Chapter 11-62, "Wastewater Systems."All six residences would use systems such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment(CBT) system evaluated in Babcock et al (2006),per LID Guidelines on wastewater treatment(Hawai`i CZM Program 2006: 4-9). The removal rates of the CBT system r would be 85 percent for TN and 75 percent for TP. Effluent from the CBT system would be disposed of in leach fields. Upon passage through the leach fields,the effluent would travel downward through unsaturated lava flows and then travel with the basal groundwater to discharge along the property's shoreline. Removal of TN and TP during passage through the leach field and unsaturated lavas are conservatively assumed to be 70 and 90 percent,respectively. The system will be managed through the homeowners' association by one of the professional wastewater companies that operate in the West Hawaii area. The proposed addition of dwellings on the 6 lots is a relatively minor action in the context of existing utility systems, and it would not have any adverse impact on existing public or private utilities. The design of the homes will incorporate features to minimize water use. 76 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision r` li t7 Existing Public Services and Facilities Fire,police and emergency medical services are available at a full-time fire station and a police station in Kapa`au located approximately 16 miles to the north. There is also a volunteer fire station j located at Kohala Ranch approximately two miles to the east. County medivac helicopter service is available seven miles south of the property on Queen Ka`ahumanu Highway at the South Kohala Fire Station,which also contains a police sub-station. Acute medical care service is available at t J Kohala Hospital in Kapa`au, and also at North Hawaii Community Hospital in Waimea, approximately 14 miles away. Solid waste from the development will be hauled by residents and/or collected and hauled by commercial disposal operators to the County's West Hawai`i Sanitary Landfill in Pu`uanahulu, which has several decades of capacity. L � Public schools in the area include Kohala Elementary School and Kohala Intermediate &High School,both of which are in Kapa`au. There are also elementary and middle schools located in both Waimea and Waikoloa. Two private K to 12 school,Hawaii Preparatory Academy and Parker School, are located in Waimea. Several State and County beach parks are located within 18 miles of I the property, including Spencer County Beach Park,Hapuna Beach State Park, Lapakahi State Park, ( � Mahukona County Park, Kapa`a County Beach Park,Kamehameha County Park and Keokea County Beach Park. Additional recreational and open space land was acquired by the County makai of Akoni Pule Highway at Ka`iholena and Pao'o; there are currently no facilities there. Pu`ukohola Heiau, a federal historical site, is located near Kawaihae.Public boat ramps are located at Mahukona,Kawaihae Harbor and Puako. n Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Public Facilities and Services The project may have an effect on public services and facilities through minor additional demand Li for fire,police, and emergency services, solid waste services, schools and recreational facilities. Taxes and a system of required fair share contributions will mitigate these impacts. Rezoning L Ordinance No. 97-42 required the following: • Rezoning Ordinance Condition P. The applicant shall make its fair share contribution to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the subject property with respect to parks and L recreation, fire,police, solid waste disposal facilities, and roads. • Rezoning Ordinance Condition E. In conjunction with Final Subdivision approval,the applicant shall construct the necessary distribution pipeline, service laterals, and fire LJ hydrants,meeting with the requirements of the Department of Water Supply. No building permit for any of the residential structures shall be issued until units of water are available u and committed to the subject property, as represented in the applicant's agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company(formerly Kohala Joint Venture). i_ 77 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision i • Rezoning Ordinance Condition K. The applicant, its successors or assigns shall prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed development within the subject property meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. A copy of the approved Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director. Although the current project is far smaller and less impactful to public services and utilities than the project for which these conditions were imposed, similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of the new Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a. It should be noted that high value rural residential/resort-residential homes in the County of Hawaii tend to provide a significant net benefit in terms of public services and facilities. A 2003 economic study of resort-residential housing(Decision Analysts Hawaii, Inc. 2003)in West Hawaii determined that on balance it provides substantial economic benefits to the Big Island. Construction and occupant expenditures are important for employment and economic growth, and the support services required by those occupying the homes and condominiums cost far less to the County and State than the large amount of property taxes they pay. Revenues are high and steady because of the large numbers of very high value units,the low percentage of homeowners who qualify for homeowner exemptions, and the high property tax rate for properties that are not occupied by homeowners. Government costs are low because developers fund most or all of the infrastructure and amenity construction costs, and often much of the operating costs. Also, low occupancy rates mean lower demand for County services, and as most residents are well-off,they require little if any government assistance. According to the report: "Thus,property-tax revenues from resort-residential projects exceed support expenditures by$20.8 million per year for existing projects($22.2 million—$1.4 million)and$25 million per year for planned projects ($26.7 million—$1.7 million). In effect,resort-residential projects provide substantial tax revenues to subsidize support services to other Big Island residents and visitors" (Ibid: 6). In summary, considering fair-share contributions and real property and other tax contributions,the six-lot Kohala Shoreline, LLC development would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. In addition.the owner would be required as part of the subdivision process to comply with the County's—Affordable HousingOrdinanceand to contribute to affordable housing.in the region. 3.3.2 Roadways and Traffic Introduction Pursuant to Section 25-2-46 (Concurrency Requirements),Hawaii County Zoning Code, a traffic impact analysis report(TIAR)is required with the application for any zoning amendment which can generate 50 or more peak hour trips. The proposed six-lot subdivision project thus was analyzed to determine the number of peak hour trips. 78 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I _J Ji I � n The trip generation methodology used is based upon applications developed by the Institute of j Transportation Engineers (ITE)and published in"Trip Generation", 8th Edition,2011. Trip generations have been developed for a variety of land uses (or facility types)which correlate trips 71 with dwelling units, area,population,vehicle ownership and intensity of use. Each facility type has U a catalog Classification number for identification purposes. In this case, Classification 210, Single- family Detached,was used. For any given classification,repeated field studies by the ITE {� measuring actual trips generated by different land uses has calculated a generator factor for peak l_; hour trips. This factor is multiplied by the number of units in a land use(in this case, single-family residences). This is further divided into trips that are entering or exiting the development, a split that r1 differs by time of day. As shown in Table 7, a six-lot subdivision generates a total of less than 12 U peak hour trips; furthermore, in this case,they are split(>5 and>7)between two separate access point s. It should be further noted that to obtain conservative estimates of potential traffic,no F-' adjustments were made to reflect the impact of less than full-time residents, which could be the U case in the study area. In any case, as the project would generate far less than 50 peak hour trips,no TIAR is necessary. n U Table 7. Project Peak Hour Tri Generation Time Number of Lots Generator Tri s Entering Trips Exiting Total Trips Using Access I Factor % I # % # # Akoni Pule Highway&South Access point AM 2 0.77 26% <I 74% <2 <3 (� PM 2 1.02 64% —1 26% <1 <2 I Akoni Pule Higliway Highway &Kohala Ranch Road AM 4 0.77 26% <1 74% <2 1 <3 PM 4 1.02 64% <3 26% 1 <4 Li The project clearly has no potential to generate substantial traffic at peak hour or any other time. r? Nevertheless, impacts to roadways and access are considered. Li Existing and Proposed Facilities The project's two short internal roadways are confined to the portion of the property immediately Li adjacent to the highway(see Figure 3). They will be designed and constructed as two private residential streets with minimum 50-foot rights-of-way,which could be slightly widened to account for slope, occupied by two 10-foot wide paved lanes with grassed or aggregate shoulders on which parking will not be allowed,to preclude wildfire ignition. The north roadway will be about 350 feet long and will provide access to four driveways and the public parking lot. The south access point will be an approximately 100-foot long stub that will provide access to two driveways. Per LID Guidelines,they will include dry swales to assist with stormwater flow reduction(Hawai`i CZM _ Program 2006). Akoni Pule Highway(State Highway 270)is the major north-south highway in the vicinity of the property, conducting traffic between Hawi and Kawaihae and beyond. Other access to North Kohala ' is available on the Kohala Mountain Road, located approximately five miles to the east(a private road for Kohala Ranch residents only connects the Kohala Mountain Road and Akoni Pule —' 79 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F] Highway). The Akoni Pule Highway,which is under the jurisdiction of the State of Hawaii,has one lane in each direction and a posted speed limit of 55 miles per hour in this area. �j The highway has a south-bound turn lane and acceleration and deceleration lanes at the intersection with Kohala Ranch Road. Several intersections are present within a mile of Kohala Ranch Road (see Figure 1b). There are no improved intersections within a mile to the north of the property, although there are unimproved and unpermitted accesses to various 4WD roads on the State property makai. The nearest existing access to the south is the first Kohala Kai Subdivision entrance, 2,140 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road,which is a three-legged intersection extending north, south and west;then Ala Kahua Road, which extends north, south and east, at 2,800 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road; then the second and third Kohala Kai Subdivision roads, 3,500 feet and 4,400 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road,which also features three-legged intersections extending north, south and west; and finally the Hokulele Road/Lela Nai'a at Kohala Waterfront Subdivision, a four-legged intersection located 5,000 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road. At a minimum of 500 feet apart,these intersections are widely spaced. No new intersections are planned or would likely be permitted, given State Highways policies. Impacts and Mitigation Measures C� As stated above and shown in Figure 3, access and egress for the six-lot subdivision will be from two new access point s along the makai side of Akoni Pule Highway. Due to the low background traffic in this area,both intersections are proposed to be unsignalized. Given the low total number of peak hour trips generated by the project,no adverse effects to local or regional traffic are expected. The north access point will be the west leg of the existing intersection of the highway with Kohala Ranch Road; it will provide access and egress to four lots. Existing conditions at the Kohala Ranch Road intersection are as follows: a southbound through lane, a northbound through lane,northbound right lane, a westboundjane and a westbound right/out lane. There is a refuge pocket for the westbound left turn lane on Akoni Pule Highway. There is adequate area to make a lane for a northbound left refuge pocket and for a southbound right deceleration lane. The south access point will also be located along the west side of the highway, approximately 1,300 feet south of Kohala Ranch Road(and the north access point); it will provide access to two lots. The proposed intersection improvements to Akoni Pule Highway at the south access point would be determined in consultation with the Hawaii State Department of Transportation,Highways Division(DOT). Improvements to both intersections would require design review by and approval from the DOT, which will also deal with the issue of utility easements in the highway right-of-way. Rezoning Ordinance No. 97-02 required the following related to roads and traffic: • Rezoning Ordinance Condition F.Access to the subject property from Akoni Pule Highway and any improvements within the Akoni Pule Highway shall be constructed prior to Final Subdivision Approval meeting with the requirements and approval of the State Department of Transportation. • Rezoning Ordinance Condition G. Roadway connections to the adjoining parcel of the subject property's southeastern boundary shall be provided meeting with the approval of the 80 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Department of Public Works and shall be delineated on the final subdivision plat map for the subject property. •Li Rezoning Ordinance Condition H.All interior roadways within the subject property shall be constructed meeting with the requirements of Chapter 23 of the Subdivision Code and with the approval of the Department of Public Works. Although the current project is far smaller and less impactful to traffic than the project for which LJ these conditions were imposed, similar conditions are expected to be imposed as part of any new Rezoning Ordinance that would grant change of zone to RA-5a, however,the project may require approval of a variance or planned unit development permit to address road standards, lot sizes and other design variances. The only mitigation required would be restriping of Akoni Pule Highway at the north access point to convert the existing refuge pocket into a northbound left turn lane. 3.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Somewhat distinct from the direct effects that construction and occupation of a housing project can have on the environment are secondary impacts. These can include impacts from residents traveling to different parts of the island for work or recreation and inducing impacts in environmentally sensitive areas. Another potential secondary impact is economic; although generally positive, increased economic activity resulting from the expenditures of new residents can draw in workers who add to the existing demand for affordable housing. In the case of the subject project, its modest scale in relation to the existing population of the island indicates that any such adverse secondary impacts would be negligible. Cumulative impacts result when implementation of several projects that individually have limited impacts combine to produce more severe impacts or conflicts in mitigation measures. It is therefore appropriate to frame the setting in the context of ongoing and future developments. The North Kohala District is primarily residential in nature,with some ongoing agricultural activities including U ranching. Some commercial activities occur in its two primary towns,Hawi and Kapa'au. This area supported some of the earliest wind farms in Hawaii and is being explored for biomass and green farming. Between these towns and the property in the very south of North Kohala lies an area of undeveloped shoreline,with expansive vistas both mauka and makai. Over the decades, several subdivisions have been proposed that would alter the character of some areas of shoreline, prompting calls by citizens to acquire open space,which have been answered by the County with several property acquisitions, as discussed in Section 3.1.5. Although on the fringe of this undeveloped area,the Kohala Shoreline property itself is adjacent to several upscale agricultural and residential subdivisions, including the more than 3,500-acre Kohala Ranch,which is continuing L) to be developed with homes. The property is near the border of South Kohala and approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Harbor, one of only two deep-draft harbors on Hawaii Island and the L only one located on its western or leeward side. A small-boat harbor,which the State has expanded, is also located there. Also located in Kawaihae is the State Department of Hawaiian Home Lands' 10,152-acre Kawaihae Tract which,while currently mostly used for grazing,will eventually be developed with commercial,residential, agricultural and community use components. The town of 81 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Kawaihae itself has a small residential population and several small commercial centers. Aside from the residential and industrial uses at the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands projects to the south of the property,no major projects are known to be proposed for development in the area. The proposed six-lot subdivision project will have minor impacts for almost all categories of F-I resources. It should be noted that the proposed change of zone limits future potential density from the 50 lots approved under SMA 379 down to six lots. Cumulative effects are potentially of concern for the following resources: F_J • Traffic: Considered cumulatively,there is a negligible effect on Average Daily Traffic on Akoni Pule Highway and all other major roads,but a slightly more substantial effect with the interaction of left turns at the main entrance of Kohala Ranch. This is mitigable by the proposed project intersection improvements,which includes a northbound to westbound left- F� turn pocket and a southbound deceleration lane. U • Visual Resources: The project will contribute to the slow transformation of the views of undeveloped coastal areas that is occurring in North Kohala. The effect is not severe in this part of North Kohala because of the extensive developed area that lies directly mauka, as F1 well as the presence of other similarly developed coastal properties to the south. This is further mitigated by the proposed project design that locates house pads away from both the highway and the shoreline,retains most of the existing kiawe tree landscape, and restricts homes to 25 feet in height in a development concept significantly less dense than allowed by existing zoning.Furthermore,the prevalence of essentially undevelopable State properties U adjacent to the north, combined with the continuing acquisition by the County of private properties makai of the highway,will cumulatively build the inventory of perpetually undeveloped shoreline in North Kohala. This will maintain the health of this scenic resource. • Water Quality: The project may minimally add to input of nutrients and other pollutants (while likely slightly reducing sedimentation)but changes of land use associated with the project should not contribute along with other actions to a decrease in water quality. A cumulative beneficial impact is the provision of a corridor, along with a landowner encouraged to be cooperative under expected SMA and Change of Zone conditions, for the establishment of the Ala Kahakai Trail across the property. As discussed in Section 3.2.2,this trail system is meant to traverse the entire west coast of the island. A trail segment on the property would provide a key link. The benefit of this section of the trail would accumulate with similar benefits for nearby U properties, helping create a coherent trail that is greater than the sum of its parts. r, C� 82 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision n i r_, 3.5 Required Permits and Approvals The following permits and approvals would be required: n • County of Hawaii,Department of Public Works, Engineering Division: Grading Permit. • County of Hawaii,Planning Department, Variance and/or Planned Unit Development Permit and Subdivision Approval. �_ • County of Hawaii, Leeward Planning Commission: Special Management Area Use Permit and Change of Zone Recommendation. • County of Hawaii, County Council: Change of Zone Approval. t-1 • State Department of Transportation: Approval for Work within State Roadway Right-of- Way. • State of Hawaii, Department of Health: Underground Injection Control (UIC)permits. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)permit. 3.6 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies U 3.6.1 Hawaii State Plan 1J Adopted in 1978 and last revised in 1991 (Hawai`i Revised Statutes, Chapter 226, as amended),the Plan establishes a set of themes, goals, objectives and policies that are meant to guide the State's long-run growth and development activities. The three themes that express the basic purpose of the Hawai`i State Plan are individual and family self-sufficiency, social and economic mobility and community or social well-being. The proposed project would promote these goals by adding housing and a location for an important coastal recreational trail for the North Kohala district, thereby enhancing quality-of-life and community and social well-being. Li 3.6.2 Hawaii State Land Use Law All land in the State of Hawaii is classified into one of four land use categories-Urban,Rural, Agricultural, or Conservation-by the State Land Use Commission,pursuant to Chapter 205,HRS. The property is in the State Land Use Urban District. The proposed use is consistent with intended ( uses for this land use district. Figure 11 depicts the high-level land use designations for three types: State Land Use District, I" County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide Map (LUPAG), and County Zoning Districts. Only the high-level categories are designated with letter codes on the map: U for Urban, A for Agricultural, C for Conservation, O for Open and R for Rural. Although the meanings of these ' terms across designation types are not identical,the purpose of the map is to show the extent of urban versus other types in the region. -' 83 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I ' f Figure lIl Regional Land Use Designations U State Land Use Districts A C Property c U c A r 1 4", ei Land Use Pattern Allocation wide Flap it A Property `� v Property r � y 1 � u 84 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Faure 12 Z�nin� ap '� �1� �it /� ��iJ'r / l/ �/�� rrli/✓1 /�rir/ //r J✓fl r!/r r�71r li i %i/J%lll /r0J 7 J %f ii✓ ' /f/iJr1/i{%/ 11 Or(q/,ytil j//fif/% i 0 %�1/ W�", Vs'r/ ��91�r���f(!1�/ lig(/�pr61�i 9�r �l�✓�J�",If`���' '��",�/�//,r✓�'/�rl��✓� �i��/��' I,�O✓%h/v/nr i�6r✓�/f/n/,//del/ G ///bl/, ✓ i a r /✓0//t rr// r l i!/i�j�/ri/�P���✓/�ii�/� i P rr, ,J���/��f//�tl/ r1 r7/1 Jr✓/r i,., �rj,AN�✓✓ly�E�����f�//y1;�I� I/rrG1/i(��j'��'� J �� ��F r1���/J2������ �li��/ '. ��✓!����/ /w//'(rf� rJ��f11/0/(r'/J'>'y'/��J1! � r/r a���/ ✓ dr� //�; ��✓�',ti'�/l ��N/�fy ry'��f� r�G/�// lr � ��J;ID��rr�' f� �� /'r�'l � r��/I�G//�rl�„� ��/, � �Y� r✓d���'1�//(J/��✓ art✓'�i/,/ rrlf������� ,!Gi��Y / .��'il���/✓�rcl/��1�?/"i/ w /'/f��v (ir F! ✓ f/i�r7rr r y r /�P�f l�'i/v rra7/� x ,� // �/// / r f� //{�l r✓ Nd I/,j�l�l �/��� r "" � l r//�/✓�l H✓�� 7 J /li /�I I l r!/1 �Ilir r � 1✓?��7`r� r � 1 e/1' a �F�li 1 �� l��/l T�/ � _ ,r i ✓�lfc�fl� fir/ /I// ��/ / �. i Jl�� /POI. yea `amu /r�` 1,L��l��f,. `4 �`'�/l '4� ��"'y .,,"�f \ � v}• r r4�, (�1���'�� J��f�`y' y � V. F`I - r d C Pa V d f 8✓ Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision r_ 3.6.3 awai`i County Zoning and. General Plan Hawai`i County Zoning. The entire property(Figure 12) carries a zoning designation of ISS-15 (single-family residential,with a minimum lot size of 15,000 square feet). The proposed action - would reduce the allowed density to an average of one home per six acres. The Hawai`i County General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG). The LUPAG map component of the General Plan is a graphic representation of the Plan's goals, policies, and standards as well as of the physical relationship between land uses. It also establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the pla' ed public and cultural facilities, public utilities and safety features, and transportation corridors. The property is classified as Low Density Urban, Extensive Agriculture, and Open in the LUPAG (Figure 13). Most of the property is designated Low Density Urban, with a small portion designated Extensive Agriculture, and a strip of Open along the shore. The proposed six-lot subdivision would be consistent with the Low Density Urban designation, which allows "residential, with ancillary community and public uses, and neighborhood and convenience-type commercial uses; overall residential density may be up to six units per acre." The shoreline area would remain undeveloped and dedicated to public access and consistent with Open under the proposed site plan (see Figure 3). The General Plan for the County of Hawaii is a policy document expressing the broad goals and policies for the long-range development of the Island of Hawaii. The plan was adopted by ordinance in 1989 and revised in 2005 (Hawai`i County Planning Department). The General Plan itself is organized into thirteen elements, with policies, objectives, standards, and principles for each. There are also discussions of the specific applicability of each element to the nine judicial districts comprising the County of Hawaii. Analysis for the EA confirms that it generally satisfies the following Goal and Policies, and Courses of Action of particular chapters of the General Plan: ECONOMIC GOALS Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life through economic development that enhances the County's natural and social environments. Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical, social, and cultural environments of the island of Hawaii. Strive for diversity and stability in the economic system. Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural and social environment. Discussion: The proposed action is in balance with the natural, cultural and social environment of the County, and it will create temporary construction jobs for local residents and indirectly benefit the economy through construction industry purchases from local suppliers. A multiplier effect takes place when these employees spend their income for food, 86 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Figure 13 LUPAG Map rF--,- `V f ' �/ r 0 r I�i1 lf�t/f �/l°/r ff����✓r;f%��ti ala d w ' 87 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision housing, and other living expenses in the retail sector of the economy. Such activities are in keeping with the overall economic development of the island. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY GOALS Define the most desirable use of land within the County that achieves an ecological balance providing residents and visitors the quality of life and an environment in which the natural resources of the island are viable and sustainable. Maintain and, if feasible, improve the existing environmental quality of the island. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICIES Take positive action to further maintain the quality of the environment. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS Pollution shall be prevented, abated, and controlled at levels that will protect and preserve the public health and well being,through the enforcement of appropriate Federal, State and County standards. Incorporate environmental quality controls either as standards in appropriate ordinances or as conditions of approval. Discussion: The proposed action,which occurs in an area designated by zoning for urban development,would not have a substantial adverse effect on the environment and would not diminish the valuable natural resources of the region. The project will obtain permits and follow the conditions designed to reduce or eliminate pollution and environmental degradation. HISTORIC SITES GOALS Protect,restore, and enhance the sites,buildings, and objects of significant historical and cultural importance to Hawaii. Appropriate access to significant historic sites,buildings,and objects of public interest should be made available. HISTORIC SITES POLICIES Agencies and organizations, either public or private,pursuing knowledge about historic sites should keep the public apprised of projects. 88 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision f' i ! Require both public and private developers of land to provide historical and archaeological j surveys and cultural assessments,where appropriate,prior to the clearing or development of land when there are indications that the land under consideration has historical significance. Public access to significant historic sites and objects shall be acquired, where appropriate. i� n Discussion: Archaeological resources have been properly assessed through an inventory t_! survey approved by SHPD. Certain sites will be subject to data recovery and preservation, and plans will be developed and approved by SHPD. Appropriate access to significant �1 historic sites will occur through burial treatment plans,preservation plans, and trails. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE GOALS Conserve scenic and natural resources. nProtect human life. Prevent damage to man-made improvements. Control pollution. Prevent damage from inundation. Reduce surface water and sediment runoff -' FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE POLICIES Enact restrictive land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of wave action. Only uses that cannot be located elsewhere due to public necessity and character, such as maritime activities and the necessary public facilities Uand utilities, shall be allowed in these areas. Development-generated runoff shall be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the 'I Department of Public Works in compliance with all State and Federal laws. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STANDARDS Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 27, "Flood Control," of the Hawaii County Code. i Applicable standards and regulations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 10, "Erosion and Sedimentation Control"of the Hawaii County Code. 89 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision FJ P Applicable standards and regulations of the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Discussion: Most of the property lies within Zone X, areas of minimal flood hazard.No home development will occur within the VE zone adjacent to the coast or within gulches. All standards regarding drainage, flooding and sedimentation will be adhered to and project design will be reviewed by and subject to permits from the Hawaii County Department of Public Works and the Hawaii State Department of Health. NATURAL BEAUTY GOALS Protect,preserve and enhance the quality of areas endowed with natural beauty, including the quality of coastal scenic resources. Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. Maximize opportunities for present and future generations to appreciate and enjoy natural and scenic beauty. NATURAL BEAUTY POLICIES Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. Protect the views of areas endowed with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of proposed construction during all land use reviews. Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty. P Li Discussion: The site plan for the project,which will be reviewed and approved by the Planning Department, maintains mauka-makai view corridors and has all structures set back a minimum of 150 feet from Akoni Pule Highway and 100 feet from the shoreline,mauka of the ala loaJeep road.All electrical and communication lines within the property will be placed underground. The Waiaka'ilio Bay area is named in the 2005 General Plan as a place of natural beauty and was also so listed in the 1989 General Plan. The subsequent granting of the RS-15 zoning and SMA Permit indicates that the proposed urban land use for the property was considered compatible with this natural beauty designation. As discussed in Section 3.1.4,the point at Waiaka'ilio Bay will continue to be visible from the highway, albeit with a mid-ground that includes some developed structures. CC&Rs will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet as measured according to Chapter 25,Hawaii County Zoning Iii Code and will require a color scheme featuring earth-tone colors to minimize visual impacts, as generally shown in the visual simulations. Although the homes will be visible,their visual impact has been minimized, and they will not appear out of character given the large Li residential-agricultural development directly adjacent to the property, and the urban appearance of coastal developments just to the south and in Kawaihae. 90 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-L©t Subdivision LJ NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES GOALS Protect and conserve the natural resources of the County of Hawaii from undue exploitation, encroachment and damage. Provide opportunities for the public to fulfill recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. Protect and promote the prudent use of Hawaii's unique, fragile, and significant environmental and natural resources. Ensure that alterations to existing landforms and vegetation, except crops, 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 earthquake. NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES POLICIES The County of Hawaii should require users of natural resources to conduct their activities in a manner that avoids or minimizes adverse effects on the environment. Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. Discussion: The proposed action would locate all homes a minimum of 100 feet from the shoreline and a minimum of 40 feet above sea level. Impacts to existing natural landforms Li and vegetation will be mitigated through permit-regulated Best Management Practices in conformance with Low Impact Design guidelines to avoid any impacts related to flooding, landslides, sedimentation or other similar impacts. F� LAND USE GOALS Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. Iii LAND USE POLICIES i L i Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community,region and County. LAND USE, OPEN SPACE GOALS Provide and protect open space for the social, environmental, and economic well-being of the County of Hawaii and its residents. Protect designated natural areas. 91 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision LAND USE, OPEN SPACE POLICIES Open space shall reflect and be in keeping with the goals,policies, and standards set forth in the other elements of the General Plan. Discussion: The proposed residential project on an urban-designated parcel would be in keeping with County and State land use plans and does not detract from important open space. HOUSING GOALS Attain safe, sanitary, and livable housing for the residents of the County of Hawaii. Attain a diversity of socio-economic housing mix throughout the different parts of the County. Maintain a housing supply that allows a variety of choices. Create viable communities with affordable housing and suitable living environments. Improve and maintain the quality and affordability of the existing housing inventory. Seek sufficient production of new affordable rental and fee-simple housing in the County in a variety of sizes to satisfactorily accommodate the needs and desires of families and individuals. Ensure that housing is available to all persons regardless of age, sex,marital status, ethnic background, and income. 1 Make affordable housing available in reasonable proximity employment lo ent centers. - Encourage and expand home ownership opportunities for residents, HOUSING POLICIES Work with, encourage and=port private sector efforts in the provision of affordable housing.- Encourage the development of affordable retirement communities. Vacant lands in urban areas and urban expansion areas should be made available F for residential uses before additional agricultural lands are converted into residential uses. 92 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Discussion: The proposed residential project on an urban-designated parcel would provide housing that would be part of the choices for current and future residents, encourage use o currently urban-zoned areas instead of agriculturally zoned areas, and provide a contribution to affordable housing. There would be no conflict with County housing goals or policies. Li 3.6.5 Chapter 205A and Special Management Area 7 Special Management Area. The property is situated within the County's Special Management Area (SMA) and an SMA Use Permit will be applied for before the Hawaii County Leeward Planning Commission. The criteria for review of development within the Special Management Area are stated in HRS, Chapter 205a-26(2) (Special Management Area guidelines) and Rule 9-11(E)in the Planning Commission Rules. Planning Commission Rule 9-11(E) states that the Authority may permit the proposed development only upon finding that: 1. The development will not have any substantial adverse environmental or ecological effect except as such adverse effect is minimized to the extent practicable and is clearly U outweighed by public health, safety, or compelling public interest; 2. The development is consistent with the objectives and policies and the Special Management Area guidelines as provided by Chapter 205A, HRS; and 3. The development is consistent with the General Plan,Zoning Code and other applicable ordinances. 4. The development will,to the extent feasible,reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist, including specific factual findings regarding: a. The identity and scope of valued cultural,historical or natural resources in the petition area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights Li are exercised in the petition area; r,---I b. The extent to which those resources, including traditional and customary ! I native Hawaiian rights,will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and U C. The feasible action, if any,to be taken by the Authority to reasonably protect any valued cultural,historical or natural resources, including any existing traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights. Based on the resources and impacts described in previous sections,the project is consistent with the above criteria, a subject which will be evaluated and discussed in detail as part of the SMA application. There is a potential that some houses in the Project could be larger than 7,500 square feet in size. Per Hawaii County SMA Rules, any proposal for a house greater than 7,500 feet must undertake an SMA Major Use Permit with the Planning Commission. 3.6.5 North Kohala Community Development Plan The North Kohala Community Development Plan encompasses the judicial district of North Kohala and was developed under the framework of the February 2005 County of Hawaii General Plan. Community Development Plans are intended to translate broad General Plan Goals,Policies, and 93 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L F1 Standards into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around the County. CDPs are also intended to serve as a forum for community input into land-use, delivery of government services and any other matters relating to the planning area. The General Plan now requires that a Community Development Plan shall be adopted by the County Council as an "ordinance,"giving the CDP the force of law. This contrasts with plans created over past years, adopted by"resolution"that served only as guidelines or reference documents to decision-makers. In November 2008, the North Kohala CDP was adopted by the County Council. The version referenced is this Environmental Assessment is at: http://www.hcrc.info/community-planning/community-development-plans/north-kohala. The purposes of the North Kohala CDP are to: • Articulate North Kohala's residents' Vision and Values for their Community • Identify North Kohala's residents' Priority Issues to be addressed by the CDP • Develop Strategies and Action Programs to address those Priority Issues The CDP,with a theme of"Keep Kohala,Kohala,"describes the district as a"Cultural and Historical Preservation Community" and emphasizes that all development decisions "shall be required to assess and disclose their potential impact on cultural sites and resources within the district and shall be in keeping with the heritage and culture of North Kohala." The overall goal of the North Kohala CDP is: "To manage the future growth of the district in a manner that is consistent with the Kohala lifestyle and ideals of being a rural community with a strong cultural heritage, an agricultural base, and a small town feel." That overall goal is expressed through four Priority Issues, each with its own Goal. The Kohala Shoreline, LLC project is compatible with Priority Issue 1 and its Goal - Growth Management. Under the CDP growth is to be directed"to areas within and near existing town centers in order to preserve the district's open space and cultural resources; and to promote agriculture." Li The area proposed for the project is bounded on the mauka side by similar rural-residential and agricultural-residential developments, which are also present in many areas makai of the highway from the subject property towards the south. This is also in keeping with CDP Section 3.3,which calls for upscale developments to be limited to areas where they are already located, as depicted in the CDP's "North Kohala Environmental&Cultural Concept Map"located on Page 25. The property is located within or immediately adjacent to the area depicted as "Existing Upscale Development"on this map. Another relevant consideration from the North Kohala CDP is the protection of viewplanes and places of natural beauty. "Strategy 1.9: Establish a View Plane Protection Program to identify and protect areas of significant beauty along the Kohala Mountain Road and Akoni-Pule Highway corridor." 94 Ell Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision I r- r The project will have all homes set back 150 feet from Akoni Pule Highway and 100 feet from the shoreline, mauka of the ala loa/jeep road.Buildings will be limited to 25 feet in height as measured under the Zoning Code and restricted to earth-tone color schemes to minimize visual impacts. The �l! natural kiawe tree landscape will be largely preserved. These factors will protect view plans. The development of Kohala Shoreline, LLC will help implement Strategy 2.5,which aims to L, "Encourage and increase cooperation and coordination between the community and private land owners regarding public access to coastal and mauka lands." The proposed shoreline access and parking area and lateral shoreline trail will help maintain and improve public access to coastal lands. The North Kohala Community Development Plan Strategy 2.6 identified vehicular access on an existing jeep road over the subject property, TMK 5-9-001:008,to Waiaka`ilio Bay as part of the coastline trail and drivable mauka-makai access element. The owner understands the desire for vehicular access across his property as part of this element, but it has foregone any such access for even itself and future buyers out of respect for input provided during community and native Hawaiian consultation,which strongly opposed crossing the ala loa with driveways. No development of any kind is to be allowed makai of the ala loaljeep road under the plan proposed by the owner. It should be noted that this is one of the steepest parts of the Ell property and would require extensive cut and fill to develop a road dedicable to the County of Hawaii. A parking lot with these impacts near the shoreline would be incompatible with the low- impact nature of the subdivision and unlike shoreline access for all other developments in the area, I which for access provide a parking lot coupled with a trail of several hundred yards to the ocean, U and sunrise to sunset access. PART 4: DETER1k.IINATION L Based on the findings below, and upon consideration of comments to the Draft EA,the County of Hawaii,Planning Department,has determined that the proposed action will not significantly alter the environment, as impacts will be minimal, and has issued a Finding of No Significant Impact F (FONSI). r-� 95 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L PART 5: FINDINGS AND REASONS Chapter 11-200-12,Hawaii Administrative Rules, outlines those factors agencies must consider when determining whether an Action has significant effects: 1. The proposed project will not involve an irrevocable commitment or loss or destruction of any natural or cultural resources. No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost.Archaeological sites are being protected through preservation plans, and there will be a wide setback zone from the shoreline to protect and promote public enjoyment of shoreline resources. The property and surrounding areas support residential and open space uses that will not be affected by the proposed action. 2. The proposed project will not curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment. The principal beneficial use of the area is for shoreline recreation,which will not be curtailed in any way—and in fact will be substantially enhanced through provision of a corridor for the Ala Kahakai trail and a wide easement area for public shoreline enjoyment. 3. Theproposedproject will not conflict with the State's long-term environmental policies. The State's long-term environmental policies are set forth in Chapter 344,HRS. The broad goals of this policy are to conserve natural resources and enhance the quality of life. The proposed action Ll provides housing in an area identified in the General Plan for such uses, fulfilling needed County and State goals while avoiding significant impacts to the environment. It is thus consistent with all 01� elements of the State's long-term environmental policies. 4. The proposed project will not substantially affect the economic or social welfare of the F, community or State. The project will not adversely affect the social welfare of the community and will contribute to the economy and to shoreline access. S. The proposed project does not substantially affeet public health in any detrimental way. j 1 L No effects to public health are anticipated. Water quality will be protected, and likely enhanced, through adherence to Best Management Practices that will be specified as part of NPDES and Grading permits. 6. The proposedproject will not involve substantial secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Only modest secondary effects are expected to result from the rural residential project. Because of the nature of the project,real property and other tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. 96 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L I U 7. The proposed project will not involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality. The proposed action is taking place in a general area already impacted in the past or currently by onsite ranching, fire and goat grazing, and by nearby construction and rural residential activities. The project would be regulated by permits to avoid environmental degradation and thus would not �} contribute to environmental degradation. 8. The proposed project is not one which is individually limited but cumulatively may have considerable effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. Li Traffic impacts from the six lots will have a negligible impact on cumulative traffic operations. The project will contribute to the transformation of views of undeveloped coastal areas occurring in North Kohala,but the effect is not severe because of the remaining extensive stretch of undeveloped coastal areas to the north, as well as the presence directly mauka and south of already developed areas. The project may minimally add to input of nutrients and other pollutants (while likely slightly reducing sedimentation)but changes of land use associated with the project should not change water quality of the offshore area to any discernible extent. E! 9. The proposed project will not substantially affect any rare, threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna or habitat. The property supports overwhelmingly alien vegetation. With standard mitigation on timing of vegetation removal to protect Hawaiian hoary bats, impacts to rare,threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna will not occur. 14. The proposed project will not detrimentally affect air or water quality or ambient noise levels. Due to the character of the proposed action,no non-negligible adverse effects on these resources would occur. 11. The project does not affect nor would it likely to be damaged as a result of being located in environmentally sensitive areas such as a flood plain, tsunami zone, erosion prone area, (v geologically hazardous land, estuary,fresh water, or coastal area. Although the proposed action is located in an area with seismic and shoreline hazard,the entire �j Island of Hawaii shares this risk, and the proposed action is not imprudent to construct.All home development will be set well back from the shoreline at elevations of 40 feet or higher to account f for potential sea level rise. Culverts within the subdivision are being planned as oversized to accommodate the 100-year,rather than the required 50-year storm, in order to account for future potential increases in runoff. i Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that climate change may lead to drier rather than wetter conditions, increasing wildfire risk. If this occurs,the substantial precautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk discussed in Section 3.1.1 will mitigate additional potential risk. 97 .Environmental Assessment Kohala,Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision 12. The project will not substantially affect scenic vistas and viewplanes identified in county or state plans or studies. The project has been designed through restrictions in density, grading,tree removal,home height and home position to minimize impacts on protected scenic viewplanes, including views from Akoni Pule Highway of the coast. The project will contribute to the transformation of views of undeveloped coastal areas occurring in North Kohala,but the effect is not severe because of the remaining extensive stretch of undeveloped coastal areas to the north, as well as the presence directly mauka and south of already developed areas. 13. The project will not require substantial energy consumption. Although the project's infrastructure and dwelling unit construction will require energy,the development's electrical requirements are within HELCO's capacity and no major adverse effects to energy consumption would be expected. There is no feasible way to provide housing without energy consumption. The project design will include photovoltaic solar, energy efficient lighting fixtures, low water use fixtures, and low water use landscaping, all of which reduce energy use. F-I ui 98 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision ii REFERENCES Allen,M. 1985.Limited Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey Kahua Shores Coastal Parcel: r_7 Kahua 1, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii (TAX.-3-5-9-01:8). PERI Reports 74-031883 and 76- 030183 . Prepared for Kahua Shores, Ltd. Babcock,R. W. Jr., A. Senthill, T. Huang, Y. Chanthawornsawat, S. Kanpirom, and J. Hu. 2006. Performance Evaluation of a CBT 0.8KF-21 0 Wastewater Treatment Unit. Project Completion Report for "Performance of an On-Site Wastewater Treatment System."Project Period : 15 May 2004 to 14 May 2005. Banko, W. E. 1980. "Population Histories—Species Accounts Seabirds:Newell's Shearwater ('A'o)."Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit,University of Hawaii at Manoa, LJI Department of Botany, Technical Report#5A. 71 Bonk, W. 1968.An Archaeological Survey of a Coastal Tract in North and South Kohala, Hawaii. U Report Prepared for the Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks, Hawaii. C( ' Day,R. H.,B. Cooper, andT. C. Telfer. 2003. "Decline of Townsend's (Newell's Shearwaters (Puffinus auricularis newelli) on Kauai,Hawaii." The Auk 120: 669-679. Decision Analysts Hawaii, Inc. 2003. "Property Tax Revenues from Premium Resort-Residential Homes and Condominiums in West Hawai'i."Prep. for: Hawaii Leeward Planning Conference, Kailua-Kona,Hawaii. DeConto, R.M. and D. Pollard. 2016. "Contribution of Antarctica to past and future sea-level rise" Nature 531, 591-597 (31 March 2016). doi:10.1038/nature17145. Dollar, S. J. 1982. "Wave stress and coral community structure in Hawaii." Coral Reefs 1:71-81. Dollar, S. J. and M. J. Atkinson. 1992. "Effects of nutrient subsidies to nearshore marine systems off the west coast of the Island of Hawaii."Estuarine, Coastal and Shelf Science 35:409-424. Ell Dollar, S. J. and G. W. Tribble. 1993. "Recurrent storm disturbance and recovery: a long-term study FI, of coral communities in Hawaii." Coral Reefs 12:223-233. LEllis. W. 1963. The Journal of William Ellis, Narrative of Tour ofHawaii, of Owhyee. Honolulu: Advertiser Publishing Co. Fletcher, C. H.,Boyd,R.,Neal, W. J., and Tice,V. 2010.Living on the Shores of Hawaii—Natural Hazards, the Environment, and our Communities. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Fornander,A. 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race:Its Origin and Migrations. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc. 99 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F] FR. n.d.Foreign Register of Kuleana Claims Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawaii State Archives. FT.n.d. Foreign Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands.Manuscript. Hawaii State Archives. Gagne, W., and L. Cuddihy. 1990. "Vegetation,"pp. 45-114 in W.L. Wagner,D.R. Herbst,and S.H. Sohmer, eds.,Manual of the Flowering Plants qfHawaii. 2 vols. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen,A.G. Frazier,J.P. Price,Y.-L. Chen,P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M.Delparte. 2014. Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii.Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., doi: 10.1 175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. Grasshoff,K. 1983. Methods of Seawater Analysis. Verlag Chemie,Weinheim, Germany. Graves, D., and L. Franklin. 1998.Archaeological Inventory Survey, Kahud MakailKahud Shores Coastal Parcels, Lands ofKahud 1 and 2 and Waikd, North Kohala District, Island ofHawaii (TAX. 3-5-9-01:7,8). PHRI Report 1024-033198. Prepared for Gentry Hawaii Company. Grigg,R.W. 1998. "Holocene reef accretion in Hawaii: a function of wave exposure and sea level history." Coral Reefs 17:263-272. Handy, E. S. C., and E. G. Handy. 1972.Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission(HCCMAC). 2017.Hawai'i Sea Ll Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report. Prepared by Tetra Tech, Inc. and the State of Hawaii.Department of Land and Natural Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, p under the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources Contract No: 64064. Hawaii County Planning Department. 2005. The General Plan, County ofHawai'i. Hilo. 2008.North Kohala Community Development Plan, County ofHawaii. Hilo Hawaii CZM Program. 2006.Low Impact Development:A Practitioner's Guide. Prepared by Horsley Witten Group for Hawaii CZM Pursuant to National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Award No.NA03NOS4190082. Honolulu. Available at: hLtp:Hfiles.hawaii.gov/dbedt/gp/czm/initiative/lid/lid guide 2006.pdf(Accessed December 2018) Hawaii StateDepartmentof Hawaiian Home Lands (DHHL). 2009.Final Environmental Assessment, Kona Carbon Project. Prep by Geometrician Associates for DHHL. Hilo. 100 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision i 1 i Hawaii, Territory of. 1929. Indices of Awards Made by the Board of Land Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands.Archives of Hawaii. Territory of Hawaii,Honolulu. n.d.Native Register of Kuleana Claims Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet " Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands.Manuscript. Hawaii State Archives. { n.d.Native Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the �i Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawaii State Archives. Heliker, C. 1990. Volcanic and Seismic Hazards on the Island of Hawai`i. Washington: U.S. GPO. 1 Kamakau, S. 1961.Ruling Chiefs of Hawai`i. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. U Kirch,P. 1985.Feathered Gods and Fishhooks:An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. .� 2011. "When did the Polynesians Settle Hawaii? A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer."Hawaiian Archaeology Vol. 12:3-26. � Kohala Shoreline, LLC Project. 2015.Draft Environmental Assessment, Kohala Shoreline, LLC n Project.,Prep. By Geometrician Associates. Hilo, Hawaii. Kuykendall,R., and A. Day. 1976.Hawaii:A History from Polynesian Kingdom to American �7 Statehood. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs. Ll Malo,D. 1951.Hawaiian Antiquities: Mo`olelo Hawaii. Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Special Publication 2, Second Edition. Honolulu: Bishop Museum Press. i Maly,K. 2000. "Historical Background."In:Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Coastal Portion of Kaiholena Ahupua a, North Kohala, Hawai`i. 1ARII Report prepared for Pohaku Kea LLC,Menlo Park. Dye and Maly(2000). Marine Research Consultants. 2015. "Assessment of Marine Water Chemistry and Marine Biotic Communities,Kohala Shoreline, LLC Project."Honolulu. Por. Appendix 2,Draft Environmental Assessment, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Project(Kohala Shoreline, LLC, 2015, Hilo,Hawai`i). Miller,E. "County acquiring Paoo land in North Kohala." West Hawaii Today. Dec. 17, 2009. Moore, J. G and Fornari,D. J. 1984. "Drowned reefs as indicators of the rate of subsidence of the Island of Hawaii."Journal of Geology 92:752-759. Newman, T. 1970.Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawai`i in AD 1778. Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks. 101 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision O'Hare, C., and S. Goodfellow. 1999.Archaeological Mitigation Program, Data Recovery Excavations, Site 50-10-05-4015, Kahud MakailKahud Shores Coastal Parcels, Land of Kahud 1, North Kohala District, Island ofHawaii(TAX.- 5-9-01:7,8). PERI Report 1572-081799.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii, Ltd. Orr,M. 2003. Cultural Impact Assessment Kahud Ranch DA GS Rainbow Tower&Facilities Pu`u Waiakanonula, Kahua Ranch, Ahupuaa ofKahudli'ili'i, District of Kohala, Hawaii Island, Hawaii. Prepared for Haun&Associates. PIFSC. 2016. West Hawai'i Integrated Ecosystem Assessment: Ecosystem Trends and Status Report.NOAA Fisheries Pacific Science Center,PIFSC Special Publication. SP-16-004. http://dx.doi.org/10.2789N5/SP-PIFSC-16-004. Pukui,M. S. Elbert and E. Mo'okini. 1976.Place Names ofHawai'i. Honolulu: University of F1 Hawaii Press. Pukui,M.K. and E.S.C.Handy. 1999. The Polynesian Family System in Kau, Hawaii. Honolulu: Mutual Publishing. Orig. Ed. 1972. Rahmstorf, S.,M. Perrette, and M. Vermeer. 2012. "Testing the robustness of semi-empirical sea 0 level projections." Climate Dynamics 39: 861-875, doi:10.1007/s00382-011-1226-7. Rechtman,R. 2004. Cultural Impact Assessment Associated with the Proposed Development of Single-Family Residence in Conservation District Land, Pdo'o Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island ofHawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0019. Prepared for Jonathan Cohen, Lincoln, MA. 2006. Cultural Impact Assessment Associated with the Proposed Development of Kohala Kai, Kahudli'ili'i, Kahudnui, and Waikd ahupitaa, North Kohala District, Island ofHawai 7. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0368. Prepared for Greg Mooers,Kamuela. Rosendahl,P. 1972 Aboriginal Agriculture andDomestic Residence Patterns in UplandLapakahi, Island of Hawaii. Ph.D.Dissertation,University of Hawaii at Manoa. Roy,K.J. and S.V. Smith. 1971. "Sedimentation and coral reef development in turbid water: Fanning Lagoon."Pacc Science 25:234-248. Soehren, L. 1964.An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Mahukona-Kawaihae Highway, U, Kohala, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology,B.P. Bishop Museum,Honolulu. U 1969. "An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Parker Ranch Coastal Lands,North Kohala". In Archaeology on the Island of Hawaii edited by R. Pearson,pp. 15-24.Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series No. 3. Social Science Research Institute,University of Hawaii,Honolulu. 102 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six Lot Subdivision Strickland J. D. H. and T. R. Parsons. 1968. "A practical handbook of sea-water analysis."Fisheries Research Bd. of Canada,Bull. 167. �_J Thrum, T.G. 1900. Excerpt from Hawaiian Annual. Honolulu,Hawai'i. _J Tom Nance Water Resource Engineering. 2010 (rev. 2015). "Assessment of the Impact on Water Resources of the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project on TMK 5-9-1:08 in North Kohala, Hawaii." Honolulu. Por. Appendix 2,Draft Environmental Assessment, Kohala Shoreline, LLC Project (Kohala Shoreline, LLC, 2015,Hilo, Hawai'i). U.S. Council on Environmental Quality(CEQ). 2016.Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews. Guidance dated August 1,2016, signed by C. Goldfuss, CEQ. U.S. Department of Commerce,Bureau of the Census. 2015. http://factfinder.census.go U (Accessed December 2018). F] U.S. Department of the Interior,National Park Service. 2008.Abbreviated Final Environmental U Impact Statement& Comprehensive Management Plan, Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. Washington,D.C. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(EPA). 2000.National Water Quality Inventory Report to Congress. 2000, EPA.p. 100-101: Chapter 10: "State and Territory Summaries: Hawaii." U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). 2019. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System (TESS). Washington: GPO. https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species-reports. (Accessed February 2019). U.S. Geological Survey(USGS). 2000. Seismic Hazard Maps for Hawaii.By F.W. Klein, A.D. Frankel, C.S. Mueller,R.L. Wesson and P.G. Okubo. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1973.Soil Survey of Island ofHawaii, State ofHawai'i. Washington: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. University of Hawaii at Hilo, Dept. of Geography. 1998.Atlas ofHawaii. 3rd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. University of Hawaii at Manoa, Sea Grant College Program. 2014. Climate Change Impacts in Hawai'i-A summary of climate change and its impacts to Hawai'i's ecosystems and communities. UNIHI-SEAGRANT-TT-12-04. 103 Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Waihona `Aina Corporation. 2000. The Mahele Database,Waihona.com. Wolfe,E.W., and J. Morris. 1996. Geologic Map o,f the Island of Hawai`i. USGS Misc. Investigations Series Map i-2524-A. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey. �J D D C{ 0 D 104 Li Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U ti f i r-, t I � } L' ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision _J Oil, APPENDIX 1 a Comments in Response to Early Consultation U Eli J �, V L [This page intentionally left blank] L9 U U U �. y J From:Fujio, Mary<Mary.Fujio@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 9:16 AM L, To: rterry@hawaii.rr.com Subject: Early Consultation on EA for TMK 5-9-001-008 (Kohala Shoreline LLC) I Good morning, Mr. Terry-- The Department of Environmental Management, County of Hawai'i, has received your U 11/10/18 letter soliciting comments on the proposed development. DEM has no comments. Thank you. Mary E. Fujio Private Secretary to William Kucharski, Director and Diane Noda, Deputy Director Department of Environmental Management County of Hawai'i 345 KekQan5o'a Street,Suite 41 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Telephone:(808) 961-8099 U r, LI U L-J 1 0 Paul K.Ferreira Harry Kim Mayor Police Chief Kenneth Bugado,Jr. Deputy Police Chief County of Hawaii POLICE DEPARTMENT 349 Kapi'olani Street • Hilo,Hawai'i 96720-3998 (808)935-3311 • Fax(808)961-2389 November 23, 2018 Mr. Ron Terry Geometrician Associates, LLC P.O. Box 396 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 SUBJECT: EARLY CONSULTATION ON ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR A SIX-LOT RESIDENTIAL AGRICULTURAL SUBDIVISION, TMK 5-9-001:008, NORTH KOHALA, ISLAND OF HAWAII Dear Mr. Terry: Staff has reviewed the above-referenced letter and has no comments at this time. It is not necessary to send a separate copy of the EA to the Hawaii Police Department. Should you have any questions, please contact Captain Jeremie Evangelista, Commander of the North Kohala District, at 808-889-6540. Sincerely, PAUL K. FERREIRA POLICE CHIEF 4AMEnC NNOR SSISTACTCOHIEF AREA II OPERATIONS ICE/jaj 18HQ0287 "Hawai'i County is an Equal opportunity Provider and Employee, i �J SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGE RP p%9 Sa ::q� CHAIRPERSON GOVERNOR OF HAWAII °�= " '•-� BOARD OF LAND.AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE ?� MANAGEMENT I r STATE OF HAWAII , ar �Q DEPARTMENT OR LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 jHONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 December 14, 2018 LJ Geometrician Associates, LLC Attention: Mr. Ron Terry via email: rterryCc)hawaii.rr.com P', P.O. Box 396 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Mr. Terry: SUBJECT: Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC u located at North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3)5-9-001:008 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. The Land Ell Division of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) distributed or made available a copy of your request pertaining to the subject matter to DLNR's Divisions for their review and comments. Li At this time, enclosed are comments from the (a) Engineering Division, (b) Division of Forestry&Wildlife, (c) Commission on Water Resource Management, and (d) Land Division — Hawaii District on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call Darlene Nakamura at(808) 587-0417. Thank you. Sincerely, L Russell Y.Tsuji - Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files i, v I ' i~ SLZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGE aP ;s sa. •,;'; CHAIRPERSON GOVERNOR OF HAWAIIBOARD OF LAND AND NAWRAL RESOURCFY y:.,. ~ } COMMISSION ON 11:ATER RESOVRCE i ` , f'.•:' RI.ANAGEAIEVT 4d and kq' y�.•.•.�j�.L.'—,' _ Fwd.fi• `'.."t.'_' �� "^.:, J.. 4i. STATE OF HAWAII s eOfNaV"'' DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU.HAWAII 96549 November 21, 2018 MEMORANDUM Ll J(Y DLNR Agencies: U ✓ Div. of Aquatic ResourcesV\A lJ _Div. of Boating &Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (� X Div. of Forestry&Wildlife `' U _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division—Hawaii District X Historic Preservation F OR � Russell Y.Tsuji, Land Administrator OBJECT: Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential r11 Agricultural Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates, LLC on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by December 12, 2018. If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. j If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417. Thank you. U ( ) We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. Comments are aftached. Signed: Print Name: r� Date: v Attachments cc: Central Files j rn Li DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y.Tsuji Ref.- Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii; TMIK: (3)5-9-001:008 COMMENTS The rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP), Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations(44CFR), are in effect when development Ms within a Special Flood Hazard Area(high risk areas). State projects are required to comply with 44CFR regulations as stipulated in Section 60.12. Be advised that 44CFR reflects the minimum standards as set forth by the NFIP. Loa community flood ordinances may stipulate higher standards that can be more restrictive and would take precedence over the FJ minimum NFIP standards. The owner of the project property and/or their representative is responsible to research the Flood Hazard Zone designation for the project. Flood Hazard Zones are designated on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIM,which can be viewed on our Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT)(http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT). If there are questions regarding the local flood ordinances,please contact the applicable Ell, County NFIP coordinating agency below: o Oahu: City and County of Honolulu,Department of Planning and Permitting (808)768-8098. o Hawaii Island: County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works(808)961-8327. o Maui/Molokai/Lanai County of Maui,Department of Planning(808)270-7253. o Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public Works(808)241-4846. Signed: CARTY .',11AV, HIEF ENGINEER Date: SUZANNE A.CASE DAVID Y.IGEx4• tss.p -Ff•�� MAIRPERSON G, - OVERNOR OFNA,WAII b;-' DOARD OF LANDANDNAWRtL RESOURCES rt,�j •` COMMISSION ON WAIM RESOURCE nfANACEnIBP'F !� Y STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTNENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 November 21,2018 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: Div.of Aquatic Resources Div, of Boating&Ocean Recreation ?C Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry&Wildlife - C1 _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management - X Office of conservation&Coastal Lands ?C Land Division—Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y.Tsuji, Land Administrator/ SUBJECT: • Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates, LLC on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC Transmitted for your review and comment* is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by December 12,2018. If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. ` If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417. Thank you. { ) We have no objections. I { ) We have no comments. { r} Comments are attached. U Signed: Print Name: DAVID Q SMITH.Adminictrafiar Date: Attachments cc: Central Files r7 L J NA ALA HELE Ina Hawaii Trail&Access System �-! November 20, 2014 LRef: H14:04 Kohala Shoreline 51 TO: Clement Chang, Trails Specialist F-1 FROM: D. Moana Rowland, Abstractor Li SUBJECT: Inquiry from Shawn Yamada of Cadsmith Ball regarding State-owned Trails through Tax Map Key 5-9-1-8 Documents disclose in 'the 1930s the Territory of Hawaii did claim ownership of a trail known then as the "Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail",which ran laterally through the r] property. However, in consideration for the landowners conveyance of other mauka U lands for roadway purposes, the Territory of Hawaii subsequently waived and withdrew its claim to all trails within the subject'land. Beginning in 1976,the successors in interest to the original owner in the 1930's would re-subdivide and consolidate the subject land with adjoining parcels resulting in-Land Court Consolidation 129. Li By 1993, Tom Gentry owns the subject parcel and submits to the County of Hawaii Planning Department a Shoreline Management Area Minor Permit No. 93-19. The County requires Gentry to provide a Pedestrian Shoreline Access. A map and metes and bounds description is prepared by Patrick Cummins, Surveyor, that delineates a Shoreline setback line for coastal public access intended to be six(6) feet.from and parallel to the highwater mark. In 1994, Gentry files a Petition for Erosion, Redesignation of Lot with Erosion and Designation of Shoreline Setback Line for Coastal Public Access. Upon approval by the State Land Surveyor, Land Court Order No. 118635 is filed and Map 5 Consolidation 129 is accepted which shows the location of the coastal public access route. Kohala LLC acquired title to the subject parcel in 1999 with the coastal-public access route cited as an encumbrance on the land. This coastal public access is not under the jurisdiction of the Department of Land and Natural Resources. iw Division of Forestry&Wildlife • Dept of Land&Natural Resources • 1151 Punchbowl Street,Room 224 Honolulu,Hawaii 988I 3 rlL Nakamura, Darlene K From: Rowland, Moana Sent: Wednesday, November 28,201811:05 AM To: Nakamura, Darlene K Subject: Kohala Shoreline LLC 5-9-1-8 Attachments: Kohala Shoreline LLC EA Consultation.PDF Aloha, Attached you will find a memo dated November 2014 that Will serve as our comments on this matter. Mahalo, Moana Dods Moana Rowland Department of-Land and Natural Resources Division of Forestry and Wildlife Na Ala Hele trails and Access Program 1151 Punchbowl Street Room 325 LI Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Office: 808-587-0057 Mobile:808-426-6967 Fax:808-587-0160 U1, U i SUZANNE D.CASE .Y P . y'0 . DAVID Y.IGE n,�; ._ ,sss.`;d\ CHAIRPERSON _ VGOVERNOR OF HAWAII �f BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES • ,•„� COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT and sal STATE OF HAWAII � ' le of DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ' I LAND DIVISION nRr p3 =: POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HKWAH 46804 November 21, 2018 in MEMORANDUM m fTO;- DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources —Div. of Boating &Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division �j K Div. of Forestry&Wildlife _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management = LJ1 X Office of Conservation &Coastal Lands X Land Division--Hawaii District .�v 7C Historic Preservation ,FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator/,"' SUBJECT: Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential �? Agricultural Subdivision �j LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates, LLC on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by December 12, 2018. 1 ) If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417. Thank you. r f1 1 i ( } We have no objections. �.' ( ) We have no comments. L ( x ) Comments are attached. t_. Signed: Isl Jeffrey T. Pearson, P.E. Print Name: Deputy Director Date: December 3, 2018 Attachments cc: Central Files FILE ID: X�FV . -1 t t , DOC ID: 120 32✓ DAVID Y.IGE SUZANNE D.CASE GOVERNOR OPHAWAS BRUCE S.ANDERSON,PH.D. WILLIAM D.BALFOUR,JR. KAMANA BEAMER PH.D. MICHAEL G.BUCK NEIL J.HANNAH$ PAUL J,MEYER STATE OF HAWAII JEFFREY T.PEARSON,P.E. DEPMOIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES F1 COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT P.O.BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII Smog December 3,2018 REF: RFD.4211.8 TO: Mr.Russett Tsuji,Administrator Land Division FROM: Jeffrey T.Pearson,P.E.,Deputy Director Commission on Water Resource Management SUBJECT: Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision FILE NO.: RFD.421 1.8 lJ TMK NO.: (3)5-9-001:008 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. The Commission on Water Resource Management(CWRM)is the agency responsible for administering the State Water Code(Code), Under the Code,all waters of the State are held in trust for the benefit of the citizens of the State,therefore all water use is subject to legally protected water rights. CWRM strongly promotes the efficient use of Hawaii's water resources through conservation measures and appropriate resource management For more information,please refer to the State Water Code,Chapter 174C,Hawaii Revised Statutes,and Hawaii Administrative Rules,Chapters 13-167 to 13-171. These documents are available via the Internet at hftp://dinr.hawaii.gov/cwrm. Our comments related to water resources are checked off below. F] 1. We recommend coordination with the county to incorporate this project into the county's Water Use and Development Plan. Please contact the respective Planning Department and/or Department of Water Supply for further information. 2. We recommend coordination with the Engineering Division of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources to incorporate this project into the State Water Projects Plan. F] 3. we recommend coordination with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture(HDOA)to incorporate the reclassification of agricultural zoned land and the redistribution of agricultural resources into the States Agricultural Water Use and Development Plan(AWUDP). Please contact the HDOA for more information. El4. We recommend that water efficient fixtures be installed and water efficient practices implemented throughout the development to reduce the increased demand on the area's freshwater resources. Reducing the water usage of a home or building may earn credit towards Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED)certification. More information on LEED certification is available at hftp:[/www.usgbe.org/leed. A listing of fixtures certified by the EAP as having high water efficiency can be found at http:/Avww.epa.gov/watersense. 5. we recommend the use of best management practices(BMP)for stormwater management to minimize the impact of the project to the existing area's hydrology while maintaining on-site infiltration and preventing polluted runoff from storm events. Stormwater management BMPs may earn credit toward LEED certification. More information on stormwater BMPs can be found at hftp:l/planning.hawaii.gov/czmrinitiativesAow-impact-developmentl F� 6. We recommend the use of alternative water sources,wherever practicable. El 7. We recommend participating in the Hawaii Green Business Program,that assists and recognizes businesses that strive to operate in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.The program description can be found online at http://energy.hawaii,gov/green-business-program. U 0 8. We recommend adopting landscape irrigation conservation best management practices endorsed by the Landscape Industry Council of Hawaii.These practices can be found online at hftp://www.hawaiiscape.comfwp-content/uploads/2013/04/LICH—Irrigaton—Conservation—BMPs.pdf, Ll LJ Mr.Russell Tsuji / | Page i� December 3.2O18 [-1 H. There may bethe potential for ground or surface and recommend that ) \ approvals for this project boconditioned upon a review by the State Department ofHealth and the developers acceptance of any resulting requirements related to water quality. F� L� 10 The proposed water supplyfor the located in designated water management area,and eWater Use Permit is U '- ired prior bm----fw-te' The Water Use Permit may beconditioned unthe requirement house dualwater supply for new industrial and commercial developments. [-7 11 A Well Construction Permit(s)is(are)are required before the commencement of any well construction . work. LJ F] 12 A Pump|nmbJlationPunnit(s)is(axe)required before ground water|sdeveloped ooa source ofsupply for . the project. |-� L} 13 Ththis project. If wellsare not planned tobeused and will bo i | . affected by any new construction,they must be properly abandoned and sealed. Apermit for well �-] abandonment must bmobtained. F-) 14 Ground-water withdrawals from this project may affect strearnflows,which may require an instrearn flow . standard amendment. L\ F-1 15 A Stream Channel Alteration Permit(s)is(are)required before any alteration can be made tothe bed � and/or banks ofesteam channel. F� L_J 16 AStream Diversion Works Pennb(s)is(mre)required before any stream diversion works inconstructed pr � | . altered. 17 APetition boAmend the Interim|nstmomFlow Standard iuequin*dfo/anynswormupandeddiversion$0 . ofsurface water. 18 �h�p|onnedaouomofvm��rfu/thiapn���heonndbeeoNenU�ed|n1hiana report Thens�na �� 'we . determine what permits or petitions are required from our office,or whether there are potential impacts to water resources. M OTHER: The Draft Environmental Assessment should discuss the projected water demands for the project, both potable and non-potable,and provide the calculations used to estimate demands. The Draft Environmental Assessment should identify the proposed water ooume(s)hosupport the ) ( and include a discussion of the potential impacts on water resources and other public trust uses of | \ water,and describe any proposedmitigation measures. Water conservation and efficiency measures tobeimplemented should also bediscussed | ( ~~ If you have any questions, please contact Lenore Ohye of the Commission staff at 587-0216. Ell, L1 ' � | L� | 1 Doc Reviews (5) RFD..4981 .8 Pacific Spaceport; RF .4983.3 Ala Wel Canal Bridge Alternatives Analysis, RFD.4984.5 Pularna Lanai Mild Basin 200-Acre IndustrialArea; RFD.4211 .8 Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision; RFD.4985.5 Heku-ao 201 H. Housing Proj Adobe Sign Document History 12103/2018 Created: 1=312018 By: Kathy Yoda(kathy.s.yoda@hawaii.gov) Status: Signed Transaction 10: CBJCHBCAABAAwX4bNg3niUGD4my2xLdYY6POApDd7d "Doc Reviews (5) RFD.4981 .8 Pacific Spaceport; RFD.4983.3 Al L a Wai Canal Bridge Alternatives Analysis; RFD.4984.5 Pulama L L anai Miki Basin 200-Acre Industrial Area; RFD.4211 .8 Six-Lot R esidential Agricultural Subdivision; RFD.4985.5 Hoku-ao 201 H H UF-1 ousing Proj" History Document created by Kathy Yoda (kathy.s.yoda@hawall.gov) 12/03/2018-10:29:31 AM HST-113 address:132.160,239.30 41 Document emailed to Jeffrey Pearson (jeff.pearson@hawaii.gov)for signature 12/03/2018-10:39:30 AM HST Document viewed by Jeffrey Pearson aeff.pearson@hawaii.gov) L11 12103/2018-8:23:12 PM HST-1P address:174.239.9.207 A Iwo A kma 'W. 1C7 �J { Document e-signed by Jeffrey Pearson Qeff.pearson@hawaii.gov) --' Signature Date:12/031201 S-8:27:32 PM HST-Time Source:server-!P address:174.239.9.207 Signed document emailed to all eligible parties. ' 1210312018-8:27:32 PM HST l ' j � L 1� i i t� (1 v A {y\+�'�!'rr 9Tw1i or HAwAPI SUZANNED.GSE DAVID Y.IGE CRAIRPERSON• GOVERNOR OFHAWAU y'� ' BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ..t COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE - 1 MANAGEMENT 041and ate` � ��•T:'�' ;.;?'e X.a ,,. STATE OF HAWAII ':,' ^r arr• s a� DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES t f 1 ^3 P ? �teofllaw LAND DIVISION _ POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 =1„tie•n f G i•ri i� ., November 21, 2018 _ c MEMORANDUM .TO: DLNR Agenciles: _Div. of Aquatic Resources _ U _Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div, of Forestry&Wildlife _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation &Coastal Lands X Land Division—Hawaii District p` X Historic Preservation jKoM: Russell Y. Tsuji,Land Administrator f`R SUBJECT: Early Consultation on Environmental Assessment for a Six-Lot Residential Agricultural Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates, LLC on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC l Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced F} subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by December 12, 2018. If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. U If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417. Thank you. U { ) e have no objections. We have no comments. (� { ) Comments are attached. (J Signed: s- " Print Name; Date: ,X 1 ',�< ! ; Attachments cc: Central Files �l >Begin forwarded message: � < >> From:boni withington<su dow >» Oate: November 12,2018 at8:20:14AMHST ° >>To:rterry@havvaii.nccorn U >»Subject: Re: Early consultation for new 6-lot Kohala Shoreline project >>Thanks for the notification, Ron.Yes, |and others would like tobeconsulted anthe project ! / progresses.Acouple ofquestions: >>Would you be able to share the information about lot locations, public access parking and rnauna- I � akaiaccess before we comment? `� rn >>Could xxesend our willingness tmbe consulted inthe project toyouviaennaU,ordoyouneeda letter? � | ( >>Will you be interviewing other stakeholders in the land'as part of the cultural impacts section ofthe E&7 Fill �� | anmverypke���dthattheovvn��� n�������tothe�ononn�ntsnn�d�abootthepreviousproject�n� looking forward toawin for both him and the community aswell amthe public. | | »> K8yvet husband and | are also celebrating today the sacrifices made for our freedoms. »>A|mhe, toni | ( LJ L� U � �i [This page intentionally left blank] n �i Ij l n U C� U U n U LI i n J Fj F I, ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision F APPENDIX Ib U Comments to Draft EA and Responses u E! Ill' r,, 1 i L lJ [This page intentionally left blank] a c� J ii LAI Imo' �ir�cr+M� Harry Kim David Yamamoto,P.E. 1 Mayor Director Wil Okabe01 � Allan G.Simeon,P.E. Managing Director Deputy Director F Vlxuu�� Of'PUtIII DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 7•Hilo,Hawaii 967204224 H (808)961-8321 •Fax(808)961-8630 public—works@hawaiicounty.gov n May 24, 2019 Hawaii County Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 El Attn:Alex Roy SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) Applicant: . Kohala Shoreline, LLC Project: Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision TMK: (3)5,9-001:008,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii We have reviewed the subject DEA and our comments are as follows: 1. Page 19 has a rational method calculation for project runoff. The runoff coefficient for hardscaped areas shall be 0.95. A more detailed drainage study shall be submitted to the Department of Public Works for review and approval. 2. Any new construction, substantial improvement or watercourse alteration within the five gulches or within the VE flood zone shall comply with Hawaii County Code Chapter 27, Floodplain Management. 3. The limits of the gulches and VE flood zone shall be encumbered with drainage easements. 4. All development-generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and shall not be directed C' toward any adjacent properties. 5. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10—Erosion and Sediment Control of the Hawaii County Code. I ' Should you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Natalie Whitworth of our Kona Engineering Division at(808)323-4853. / Ben E. Ishii,Division Chief W Engineering Division NW cc: Geometrician Associates(Ron Terry) ENG-HILOtKONA geometrician ASSOCIATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808)969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 Ben E. Ishii, Division Chief Engineering Division Hawaii County Department of Public Works 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 Hilo HI 96720-4224 Dear Mr. Ishii: Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision,TMK 5-9-001:008, North Kohala,Island of Hawaii Thank you for your comment letter dated May 24, 2019, on the Draft EA. In answer to your specific comments: 1. Drainage Study. When and if the Change of Zone approval and SMA Use Pen-nit are granted, and the precise number of lots (if the approval and permit process determines there will be less than six), lot layout, road and/or driveway configurations, and public access infrastructure are determined in consultation with approving bodies for the permits, the project engineer will prepare a detailed drainage study.The engineers will utilize a runoff coefficient of 0.95 for hardscaped areas, unless it is determined mutually through consultation with your office that a different coefficient is appropriate. This information has been added to the Final EA. 2. Compliance with Chapter. 27 for construction or alteration in the VE Flood zone.or within the gulches. It is stated in the EA and understood by the owner and project engineer that all work must comply with Chapter 27 of the County Code. 3. Limits of gulches and VE flood zone shall be encumbered with drainage easements. The owner would be agreeable to this condition at subdivision. This information has been added to the Final EA. 4. Development-generated runoff to be disposed of onsite. This requirement of Chapter 27 and the County's Storm Drainage Standards is understood to be required and so stated in the EA. 5. Earthwork and grading shall conform with Chapter 10 of the Hawaii County Code. Conformance with Chapter 10 is understood to be required and so stated in the EA. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 969-7090. n i LJ Sincerely, IU II Ron Terry,Principal Geometrician Associates Imo' Cc: Michael Yee, Director, Hawaii County Planning Department `- Steven Lim, Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP U U U EI f U U LJ Li I U u I i '. t_ SUZANNE 0.CASE CElA1RPP.RSON DAVID Y.IGE a° teao+ '' DOARDOFLANDANDNATURALRESOURCES GOVERNOR OF HAWAII h r COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE € •� MANAGEMENT x .y •ryk. �'atis:Stt�`� STATE OF HAWAII Stile=;io DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 June 7, 2019 !J County of Hawaii Planning Department via email: planning@hawaiicountv.00v L1Attn: Mr. Alex Roy 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr. Roy: SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6- Lot Subdivision located at North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9- 001:008 Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. The Land Division of the Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) distributed or made available a copy of your request pertaining to the subject matter to DLNR's Divisions for their review and comments. At this time, enclosed are comments from the (a) Engineering Division, (b) Division of Forestry & Wildlife, (c) Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands, and (d) Land Division — Hawaii (� District on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact U Darlene Nakamura at(808) 587-0417 or email: darlene.k•nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, U Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosures u cc: Geometrician Associates (w/copy) j Attn: Mr. Ron Terry(via email: rterrv@hawaii.rr.com) Central Files �I �.J I , r—} O P p SUZANNE D.CASE. K� ""'•4q. 1 t3 �} CHAIRPERSON _J DAVID Y.IGE !•' la Sa,'p y i E C E V V E GOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL.RESOURCES GOVERNOR OF HAWAII � . ' MISSIONESOURCF LANDD IS[O� SANAGE(FAR + t% N4t 2019 MAY 24 AM 11: 36 STATE OF HAWAII �� ',r L { DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RE�.q E a � r'ateolrs�++a" LAND DIVISION p, 'A� RE s p S TKI1 OF 4AVI A l i r POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 7 May 17, 2019 MEMORANDUM j ;_J DLNR Agencies: 1J Div. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating &Ocean Recreation (� X Engineering Division U X Div, of Forestry&Wildlife LL°- _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management U XOffice of Conservation& Coastal Lands X Land Division-Hawaii District XHistoric Preservation F 4<5'M-: t'N' Russell Y.Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed.Kohala Shoreline 6-Lot Subdivision I-4 LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. Please submit any comments by June 5,2019. The DEA can be found on-line at: http:/Ihea1th.hawa#.Qov1oeacl(Click on The Environmental Notice in the middle of the page.) jIf no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. - If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at dariene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. { } We have noijections. { �t) We have nohcomments. { ) Comments ar ttachec. Signed: � x Print Name: Cbrty S. C ang, Chief Engineer Date: Attachments cc: Central Files I D �q7*3 D SUZANNE D.CASE xgl,i i9J<Ohah CHAIRPERSON DAVID Y.IGE +'''Y!, BOARD 01;LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES GOVERNOR Of HAWAII ;i'"'`.?s' COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE NANAMMKr D STATE OF HAWAII ' haH+ DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 May 17, 2019 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources _Div. of Boating&Ocean Recreation «r.. X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry&WildlifeLq _Div. of State Parks '' co X Commission on Water Resource Management X office of Conservation &Coastal Lands ' _LLand Division—Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6-Lot Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced '1 subject matter. Please submit any comments by June 5,2019. The DEA can be found on-line at: hifp:/1health.hawak-gov/oeac/(Click on The ,Environmental/Notice in the middle of the page.) U If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or D by email at dariene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. We have no objections. } We have no comments. } Comments are attached. Signed: Print Name: Date: Jun 3,2019 Attachments cc: Central Files D r i `- SULANNED.CASE CNAIRPERSON .(f^,p r NR BOARDOFIAND AND NATURAL REWIRMS ID DAVY.IGE AP tg69�hh y CDAtl.RSSIONONWAi£ARF.SCNTRCEAtANAOEM}Nt •-1 GOVERNOROFHAWAII 1 RBBERT&MASUDA �, .� Y FNtST DF.PJIY 1f �> M.I4ALE4 A]ANUEI, �� �Y`- DEPifIYO6tECIOR•WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES ItOATtR ANDf CONN YA RCES BUREAU OF CONVF.YAt.CER GEMENT STATE OF HAWAII T KIN CO?4USS SE VATION NDCOASTALRESOURCE SAN D!I CONSEAVATNDRUOUOASTA"FORCE f1AwA�I' DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONRNRYADt%VAEMMERRCESFJ7FUACk51iM DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE FORM.IICeREESSERVATION u' KANODIAWF.IStANDRESEAVECDMMISSION 1151 PUNCHBOWL STREET,ROOM 325 SA\'O HONOLULU,HAWAII 96813 SIATEPARRS May 31,2019 Ell MEMORANDUM TO: Hawaii County Planning Department Attention:Alex Roy FROM: David G. Smith, Administrator,Division of Forestry and Wildlife SUBJECT: Request for Comment for Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision LOCATION: Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii,Tax Map key: (3)5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Kohala Shoreline, LLC(c/o Carlsmith Ball) Thank you for the opportunity to review the Draft Environmental Assessment prepared by Geometrician Associates regarding the planned six-lot subdivision named Kohala Shoreline. After reviewing the documents and conducting research, the Hawai°i Island Branch staff have provided the following comments: NA Ala Hele Trails and Access Program The plans for the 10' wide shoreline access easement show the route as straight lines, but contradictorily, the topography is irregular. The easement should be surveyed according to how j the path will actually be laid out and the map and plans updated. The pians also show this easement passing through the archaeological no=build buffer of site 4010. Construction of the path through this buffer would violate the archaeological no-build buffer provision. I The easement for the makai trail is also very close to the coastal cliff area and will be susceptible to sea-level rise impacts (as described in section 3.1.2). This easement should be modified as a floating easement, so trail reroutes can be constructed when portions of the cliff and trail collapse, as has happened in other areas along that coast. It is unclear if this will be guaranteed under the statement "The applicant will seek to dedicate an easement on each lot makai of the ala loa/jeep for the entire length of the property for public access..." as stated in section 3.2.2. There is also inconsistency in the hours of public use. The DEA states the parking area would be open half-hour before sunrise to half-hour after sunset, but the SMA Permit 379 states - a 24 hour provision. We support 24-hour public access on public accesses and to public lands/shorelines. Not all fishing types lend themselves to daylight hours. In addition, cultural —` rights can be exercised at all times, depending on their purpose. This public use is not linked to density,so we can expect the new SMA to reflect the same provisions. L In addition to your consultation with the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail, please also consult the Na Ala Hele Trails and Access Program. It should be noted to Geornatrician Associates LLC that any future projects that may involve trails and/or access, to consult Na Ala Hele Trails and Access program. If you have any questions regarding trails and access matters, please contact Jackson Bauer,Na Ala Hele Trails Specialist at 808-657-8041 or iackson.in.baLie rrcr hawvaii.tgov. � Forestry Program The proposed development may impact federally endangered species Abutilon menziesii (ko`oloa`ula) and Sesbania tomentosa (`ohai) whose habitat range includes this project area. Caution is urged if there is to be any disturbance of vegetation close to the shore. In addition, extreme care should be taken to avoid the introduction of fire ants and other invasive species. Do not transport materials from known infested sites. Due to the area's extremely dry relative humidity and high fire fuels, the Final Environmental Assessment should also discus wildfire mitigation plans. This should include mitigating the spread of any fire to outside the project area. If you have any questions regarding plant and forestry matters, please contact Lyman Perry,Hawaii District Botanist at 808-974-4221 or IN,man.-PerryLa-hawvaii,gov. Wildlife Program If you have any questions regarding wildlife matters, please contact Kanalu Sproat, West Hawaii Wildlife Biologist at 808-887-6061 or kanalu.sproatriz),hawwraii,aov. D D Cl SU'LANNE D.CASE { DAVID Y.IGE r'Ir ,coS tes$ Q CHAIRPERSON . , f GOVERNOR OF HAWAjI �} 1 M ',' ROA ► a, R O OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES 'Ar.r [J DIVISION f COMMISSION ON 1YATER RESOURCE 2 AIANAGENIENT d and A. t i-k-;'T. OF I.A40 STATE OF HAWAII i r�ornaY,,e'i.!T1}k A L R is S 0[1)V JtTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES STATE OF HAWAII LAND DIVISION t POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 LJ May 17, 2019 S MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources �-- _Div. of Boating &Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division IJ XDiv. of Forestry&Wildlife Ell _Div. of State Parks X . Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation &Coastal Lands ?C Land Division—Hawaii District _ X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6-Lot Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. Please submit any comments by June 5, 2019. ` The DEA can be found on-line at: http://health.hawaii.govIbegc/(Click on The Environmental Notice in the middle of the page.) If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by emaii at darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. ( } We have no objections. L ( We have no comments. _ ( } Comments ar ttach��� Gf� ; i Signed: Print Name: 'e2 Date: Attachments */opjpq cc: Central Files Alt t f`�I�. a SU AHNED.CASE ��� ��,_i4 CHAIRPERSON DAVID Y.16E .Cxby LAND OOVEM10fi 0FHAWAO b fr '+ OOARD OBISSION AND NATURALRESOURCE COFiM111fiS1M ON MANAGEMENT RESOURCE M1UNAOEM1iENT +11. STATE OF HAWAII s>l� Ha„d► DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION n POST OFFICE BOX 621 I I HONOLULU,HAWAII 96609 n May 17, 2019 MEMORANDUM ' 6 �� aTO: DLNR Agencies: Div.of Aquatic Resources —Div.of Boating &Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division a X Div. of Forestry&Wildlife _Div.of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management c; n X Office of Conservation&Coastal Lands " ` c::)r`•' �J 71-and Division–Hawaii District ;; Historic Preservation X c FROM: Russell Y.Tsuji,Land Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6 Lbt Subdivision LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii;TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced �� subject matter. Please submit any comments by June 5,20`#9. The DEA can be found on-line at ftV_;(&e.sl D t�r,�q�r�j{govJosacl(Click on The Environmental Notice in the middle of the page.) If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at dariene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gay. Thank you. ( ),.,We have no objections. ( iT We have no comments. ( ) Comments are attached. Signed: L Print Name: ., A4912- Date: 4912"Date: s / U, Attachments cc: Central Files a LJ F j SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGS CHAIRPERSON lU dOVERNOR OF HAWAN q -t`r..; BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT F111 STATE OF HAWAII st DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 0 June 10, 2019 U County of Hawaii Planning Department via email: planning@ hawaiicounty,gov Attn: Mr.Alex Roy 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr. Roy: Y SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6- Lot Subdivision located at North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9- �j 001:008 U Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. In addition to our previous comments dated June 7, 2019, enclosed are comments from the Division of Q Forestry & Wildlife on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or email: darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. Sincerely, Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosure cc: Geometrician Associates (w/copy) Attn: Mr.Ron Terry(via email: rterrv@hawaii.rr.com) Central Files i ' 1L IgM--) F O^«MN SUZANNE D.CASE (� DAGE pr+ > a a+�?k BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES I{I CHAIRPERSON QOYEHNOR OF NOR O<;HAWAq ;` Vtt�� COT•lt,USS10N ON NATER RESOURCE MANAGEMONT + aw n STATE OF HAWAII s}ahaly DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 ,, HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 ' May 17, 2019 Mcin _ MEMORANDUM Zz DLNR Agencies: , Div. of Aquatic Resources ~n x W —Div. of Boating &Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry&Wildlife Div. of State Parks XCommission on Water Resource Management }C office of Conservation&Coastal Lands 71-and Division–Hawaii District X Historic Preservation F/OM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Draft Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Kohala Shoreline 6-Lot Subdivision a LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: Geometrician Associates on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. Please submit any comments by June 5,2019. The DEA can be found on-line at htto:llhealth.hawaii.govloegcl(Click on The Environmental Notice in the middle of the page.) , If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or J by email at darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. ( } e have no objections. ( \,cif'We have no comments. ( } Comments are attached. Signed: Lz1z&&z Print Name: &A-U-11-3 G.SMUK AdminlAnder Date: Attachments j cc: Central Files I-J geometrician L-J ASSOCIATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning U phone: (808) 969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 U Russell Y. Tsuji,Administrator Hawaii State DLNR Land Division P.O. Box 621 Honolulu HI 96809 Li Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Dear Mr. Tsuji: Subdivision,TMK 5-9-001:008,North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Thank you for your letter of June 7, 2019, providing a series of comment memo forms and associated comment letters from various agencies within DLNR concerning the Draft EA. We first wish to acknowledge the no-comment/no objection memos by the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, the Engineering Division and the Hawaii District Land Office. We also note that you sent another letter on June 10—2 days past the comment deadline, transmitting another no-comment letter from a branch of the Division of Forestry and Wildlife,which itself appears dated June 7, prior to the comment deadline. In response to the substantive comments from DOFAW, we offer the following. 1. Na Ala Hele:Alignment of the access routes. Please note that these alignments are conceptual. USeveral approvals are required and additional work needs to be done before the act of surveying establishes the actual route on the ground. The actual route will be not be a straight line but will involve a practical path down the slope that follows to the extent feasible a previous trail, - F I which was requested by cultural consultees. No encroachment into burial site buffer zones will occur. This has been emphasized in the wording for the Final EA. 2. Na Ala Hele: Shoreline trail(s) and sea level rise. There are two shoreline parallel trails discussed in the EA. One has existed for many decades, is defined by metes and bounds within the deed for the property, and cannot be altered. The other one—presumably more mauka and ultimately expected to be part of the Ala Kahakai NHT—is conceptual. The landowner has repeatedly been requested by the National Park Service, the Planning Department and community shoreline.access groups to utilize the old Ala Loa as the alignment for this trail, to which the landowner has agreed. The trail is almost entirely 30-60 feet above sea level, with a very short segment at a lower elevation. The landowner is amenable to altering the trail's location in this segment so that it lies at a slightly higher elevation to account for sea level rise, but this would need to be worked out with the agencies and groups with an interest in the trail. Since the owner has agreed to require all building to be mauka of the 40-foot elevation line, there will be adequate area to realign the trail in this area even if significant sea level rise L occurs. The exact location of the trail is expected to be decided during discussions with the FJ Planning Commission, Leeward Planning Commission, County Council.The input of Na Ala Hele will continue to be sought and welcomed as the trail's location is finalized. 3. Na Ala Hele: Inconsistency in hours of public use. There is no inconsistency. The conditions of SMA Permit 379 are listed for a historical reference. SMA Permit 379 was for a previous, much denser development permit and is not in effect. There will be no restriction on night fishing, only on parking access. Lateral access to the major fishing spot on the coastline, at Waiaka'ilio Bay, can easily occur from the State land directly to the north. Your agency, DLNR, enforces similar restrictions at what was likely traditionally the premier night fishing area in Kohala,Hapuna Beach (on land owned by the public and managed exclusively for the benefit of the public, we would note). In fact, nearly every public access in the area has similar restrictions. 4. Na Ala Hele: Consultation of Na Ala Hele. As we have throughout the process, we will continue to consult Na Ala Hele. 5. Forestry Program comments concerning two endangered plant species and fire.Abutilon menziesii and Sesbania tomentosa were exhaustively searched for on three occasions between 2013 and 2018, and it can be conclusively stated that these species are not and have not been present and are not likely to suddenly emerge. Please see the summary and Section 3.1.1 for a discussion of wildfire prevention measures. It is recognized that fire is a critical issue, and the project team welcomes input concerning additional measures to prevent and respond to fires. We very much appreciate your review of the document, including circulation to various DLNR agencies. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 969-7090. Sincerely, Ron Terry, Principal Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee,Director, Hawaii County Planning Department iI Steven Lim, Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP F1 U Ll I J is t_j F Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana - Kako'o P.O. Box 76 Hawi, Hawaii 96719 June 7, 2019 U Michael Yee, Director Planning Department, County of Hawaii 71, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3, Hilo, HI 96720 U, Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline LLC F, Subdivision TMK: 5-9-001:008 Kahuali'ili'i (Kahua 1), North Kohala Dear Director Yee, Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above Draft Environmental Assessment. We are an incorporated non-profit cultural, environmental organization made up of North Kohala residents that has actively worked for the preservation and stewardship of the North Kohala coast for over 30 years. Kakoo was also previously known as Citizens for Protection of the North Kohala Coastline and Hui Lihikai. We have participated in the County's regulatory issues regarding the land identified as 9L TMK 5-9-001-008 for many years with the current and previous owners. In August 2015 we submitted five pages of comments on the DEA for the previous subdivision. Our concerns were quite specific and some of them have been addressed in the re- configuration of the project as described in the current DEA. Some have not. We want to thank the owner of Kohala Shoreline and its representatives for being responsive to ongoing communications with us and residents of the North and South Kohala Districts. Our comments on this Draft EA presented here are focused on a major Lomission in the Cultural Impact Statement. It is our conclusion that displacement from cultural resources by the development of coastal lands on the Island of Hawaii has resulted in the widespread community belief and practice in support of preserving the undeveloped North Kohala coastal properties as lands open for all. This belief and practice started over fifty years ago and has gained well-documented momentum to the point that it can be said to be a cultural practice of the community of North Kohala. The efforts of many generations of Kohala residents, both Native Hawaiians and others, conform to the definition of traditional cultural properties as found in the National Register Bulletin 38 by the US Department of Interior-National Park Service, as quoted in the DEA. Therefore it should have been identified and steps offered to mitigate the displacement. F1 By the DEA authors'own criteria for distinguishing traditional cultural properties, the North Kohala movement to preserve access to its coastal lands meets the standards for that designation. • Preservation of cultural and historic sites is a keystone to the efforts by the community. With forty unstudied archaeological sites, many of them pre-contact, identified, the land is likely to yield information important for research on pre-history and history. • The efforts of the community have "important value to the Native Hawaiian people or to any other ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional beliefs, events or oral accounts -these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity." (6. d and e, page 30) The North Kohala community efforts to preserve its open coastline are so well known and integrated into the life of the district that this is now a core principle of local regard for land use planning. We believe that it is imperative that this should be reported on during any attempt to privatize and build structures, so that the owner, potential buyers, and government agencies involved in decisions on any land use matters regarding Kohala Shoreline LLC land, can be aware of this cultural practice and respond with mitigation. The parameters of the cultural property are the coastal lands of the district of North Kohala, and the participants are several generations of residents of North Kohala. This activity has a lifespan of over fifty years. While it is easy to see the land owner's rights to develop and build on property in order to have vacation houses and achieve profit, it is less easy, but in our view paramount, to understand the attachment that people of a community have toward open coastal land where they have enjoyed unfettered fishing, gathering and recreational access rights for many generations. The DEA rightly mentions the malama `aina-the cultural trauma of Native Hawaiians being separated from land, this concept applies, we believe, to all people who experience generations-long association with special places in their lives. The DEA says the land has been privately owned for over 100 years and that access for traditional uses,has never been prohibited, 'a situation that will continue under the current proposed development."This is untrue. Traditional vehicular access to and along the coast on jeep roads has been in existence since ancient times and has been gated and locked off for many years. The DEA says the land is "lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers." But this is because it has been locked. This longstanding vehicular access is noted in the North Kohala Community Development Plan Public Access chapter and is recommended by the plan to continue. lJ The public access plan described in the DEA has no vehicular access beyond a parking lot near the highway and all access would be restricted to daylight hours. We believe that the loss of this access to our members and to the residents of North Kohala, who have fought so hard to maintain an open coastline, would constitute an injury to their enjoyment of life and therefore should be considered in the determination of the cultural and environmental impact of the proposed development. Following is a history of the efforts by North Kohala residents to preserve the district's coastline: 51, Preserving the North Kohala Coast ri Conserving the North Kohala Coast has over a 50-year documented history of community support for and work to preserve this coastline in open space and keep it free of any development makai of Akoni Pule Highway. The 50 years worth of legal challenges, petitions, government resolutions, letters, and plans are summarized below. J The on-going efforts were ignited by Kohala's respected kupuna have worked to preserve the Kohala Coastline in open space. Their names and signatures are on many of the documents, Fill petitions, and letters summarized below. These kupuna are: Clyde'Kindy' Sproat, Kamaka Ai'a, William Akau, Armstrong Yamamoto, Marie Solomon and Michael Isaacs. COASTAL LAND PURCHASES -- From 2006 to 2019 five community groups spearheaded the nomination of 14 coastal parcels to the County Open Space Fund, the State Land Legacy Fund and federal lists of important coastal lands. These efforts have led to seven purchases using County, State, Federal and Land Trust funds for lands at Lapakahi, Pao'o, Kauhola Point, Hapu'u, and three purchases in the ahupua'a of Kaiholena. The purchase of 83-acres of land at Kapanaia has been funded and is in the mill. Also the County has authorized the purchase of three additional parcels. In all, the community has turned 390 acres of private land into Li preserved open space by raising a total of$20.9 million. Most of 15 miles of leeward coast and most of 4.5 miles of northern coast have been preserved. Of the thirteen properties listed on the Mayor's Annual priority list for public purchase this year, eight are on the North Kohala Coast. Ei The groups nominating and seeking funds to purchase open space land are Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana—Kako'o, Malama Kohala Kahakai, Malama Na Wahi Pana 0 Kohala, Maika'l Kamakani 0 Kohala and the Kohala Cultural and Historic Group. THE NORTH KOHALA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN (County Ordinance 08-151) NKCDP was written by North Kohala residents between 2006 and 2008 and is still the Districts's guiding planning document. The strategies and goals selected for inclusion were based on the voices of 1009 people. The document prioritizes acquiring coastal lands and preserving them in open space free of development. Four parcels in particular were recommended -- Kukuipahu- Haena, Mahukona, Pao'o, and Kaiholena. One of the strongest chapters of the plan lays out a GIS map and detailed description of strategies for increasing public access to the ocean and the mountain, proposing a trail from Pololu Valley to Kawaihae. NORTH KOHALA COMMUNITY ACCESS GROUP,formed to carry out the recommendations of the NKCDP, has been meeting monthly for eleven years to work on access issues including lateral coastal and mountain trails and a series of mauka-makai vehicular accessways. The group is meeting with County, State and Federal agencies as well as land trusts.There are currently 80 people who receive monthly email agendas and minutes of meetings. Along with the five groups nominating open space acquisition, the access group has formed a non-profit Kohala Lihikai for the purpose of coastal stewardship of land and trails. In 2015 RESPONSE TO THE KOHALA SHORELINE LLC DEA FOR A NINE-LOT SUBDIVISION of TMK 5-8-001:008 numerous Kohala groups and individuals made comments pointing out deficiencies of the document. At the Kohala Shoreline hearing before the Board of Appeals twelve groups and individuals testified to support the Planning Director's deferral for final historic sites approvals. In 2012 KOHALA LIHIKAI WAS FOUNDED as a 501 (c)3 nonprofit corporation, with a board of directors made up of representatives of the active coastline groups. It is currently acting as steward of lands at Kaiholena, Pao'o and the Upolu Airport makai properties for Hawaii County and Airport Division. In 2008, HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL PASSED ORDINANCE 237 to downzone this same coastal parcel, TMK 5-9-001:008, now owned by Kohala Shoreline, and the subject of this DEA, because of the need to better protect the coast. The move was proposed by the County Planning Director and supported by a large contingency of Kohala residents. The measure was vetoed by the Mayor. In 2008, STATE HOUSE BILL 2606, strongly supported by Kohala residents, called for the downzoning of North Kohala coastal lands owned by the State to Conservation to ensure open space protection and eliminate the threat of development. In 2006, THIRTY(30) KOHALA BUSINESSES AND ORGANIZATIONS signed a letter requesting Mayor Kim to prioritize the North Kohala Coast for permanent protection. In 2002, the KOHALA HISTORIC AND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE submitted a petition with more than 1,000 signatures requesting the County protect and preserve the Kohala Coastline. In 2002,the COUNTY OF HAWAII PLANNING COMMISSION with the agreement of the HAWAII COUNTY PLANNING DIRECTOR recognized the significance of the feeling of open space that is so important to North Kohala and incorporated SR 146 into the Hawaii County General Plan. In 2001, SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 146, S.D. 1, passed both houses of the State Legislature, urging the retention and preservation of open space and view planes, historic sites, and traditional access along the coastline of the North Kohala District and again called for collaboration to discourage subdivision and building development. In 2001, CHAIRPERSON of the STATE BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES, Mr. Gilbert Coloma-Agaran, testified before the State Senate Committee of Water, Land, Energy and Environment, in support of SR 146 and pledged DLNR's support to coordinate with the residents of Kohala and County of Hawaii. His testimony also recognized the importance of the numerous natural, scenic, historic and cultural resources abounding in Kohala and its coast. In 2001, the ASSOCIATION OF HAWAIIAN CIVIC CLUBS (representatives of all Civic Clubs) passed a resolution urging the Hawaii County Council to re-designate the North Kohala Coastline to Conservation/Open. The resolution recognized a long history of community support for preserving the Kohala Coast and that the North Kohala coastline is historically and culturally very important to all people of Hawaii, but particularly to Native Hawaiians. In 2001, the KOHALA HAWAIIAN CIVIC CLUB, KOHALA FILIPINA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, KOHALA PUERTO RICAN SOCIAL CLUB, KOHALA HISTORIC AND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE AND KUPUNA WILLIAM AKAU requested the Hawaii County Council to place a moratorium on all subdividing and development makai of Akoni Pule Highway from Kawaihae to Pololu Valley. In 2001 and then again in 2002,the KOHALA COMMUNITY REPRESENTED BY KUPUNA and many community members signed and sent a letter to the County documenting Kohala's 30+years of work to protect the Kohala Coast.This letter recognized that people from all over the Island (Ka'u, Hilo, Puna, Hamakua, Kona) still come to Kohala with their families to fish and camp. In 2000,the KOHALA HISTORIC AND PRESERVATION COMMITTEE collected well over six hundred signatures from Kohala residents and submitted them as part of a community response to the update of the Hawaii County Comprehensive Plan, urging the preservation and protection of the region from Kawaihae to Pololu Valley. In 1999 THE SUPREME COURT OF HAWAII ruled that Citizens for Protection of the North Kohala Coastline had standing in their case against the County of Hawaii challenging the lack of HRS Chapter 343 environmental review of a planned resort at Mahukona. Li In 1994, SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 116 called on the Department of Land and Natural Resources to consider public acquisition of the Kohala Coast prior to construction of any Ell additional infrastructure. In 1994, SENATE RESOLUTION 85 urged DNLR to consider Kohala Coastal acquisitions. In 1993, THE HAWI TOWN CONFERENCE participants identified the"undeveloped coastline" as a defining element of the town character. In 1992, SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 211 called on the County and State to develop a plan to protect the open space and historic sites makai of Akoni Pule Highway and to promote non-exclusive public enjoyment of the area AND that the County and State should discourage any subdividing and building until such a plan is in place. In 1992, THE NORTHWEST HAWAII OPEN SPACE AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT F PLAN, calls for a comprehensive effort to protect valuable North Kohala coastal areas as open space for public use and enjoyment. Li In 1991, GOVENOR JOHN WAIHE'E CALLED FOR THE PROTECTION OF THE NORTH KOHALA COAST IN HIS ANNUAL ADDRESS. L! In 1990, LOCAL RESIDENTS PRODUCED A VIDEO CALLED 'NORTH KOHALA COAST— THE SILENT TREASURE" FEATURING CLYDE 'KINDY1 SPROAT, WILLIAM AKAU AND OSCAR AHUNA documenting the community's desire to protect the Kohala Coast from developement. In 1990,the HAWAII STATE DEMOCRATIC PARTY and the HAWAII COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY both adopted resolutions at their conventions calling for the State and County to develop and implement a plan to protect the open nature of the coast, preserve its valuable historic sites and promote nonexclusive enjoyment of it by residents and visitor alike." In 1990, DECISION—ACTION 90's, a report to Hawaii County, calls on the State and County to 11 quickly and clearly establish areas in the County that are never to be developed" and cites Kohala as an example where development should be discouraged. In 1990 NORTH KOHALA COASTLINE CONFERENCE hosted government officials, land owners and many residents who made recommendations to form a special area designation for the coast such as scenic heritages or historic corridor, as well a guarantee continued ocean access. In the 1990s THE STATE LAND BOARD CITED A DEVELOPER AT PUAKEA BAY RANCH for numerous violations of land use permits brought up by the Citizens for Protection of the North Kohala Coastline. Besides paying fines, the developer agreed to turn over shoreline land to the State's Na Ala Hele Trail System for public access. In 1989,the HAWAII COUNTY COUNCIL at the urging of Kohala residents passed a resolution calling for protection of the coastline from development and calling for a survey of the coast. The resolution was passed unanimously. In 1989,the WEST HAWAII REGIONAL PLAN says the State and County have already over- committed West Hawaii in resort and resort-residential development and shows no resort- residential development in North Kohala. The plan identifies the cliffs and valleys of Kohala Mountain and the panoramic coastal views from Kohala Mountain as highest on its list of "important scenic heritage resources." In 1988, almost 6,000 HAWAII ISLAND SIGNATURES WERE COLLECTED FOR A PETITION CALLING FOR A BUILDING MORATORIUM makai of Akoni Pule Highway. The signature were collected by the Citizens for the Protection of the North Kohala Coast and over half of the signatures were from Kohala. In 1988 CHALON INTERENATIONAL PURCHASED THE FORMER SUGAR PLANTATION AND OTHER LANDS AT MAHUKONA. Contrary to residents' recommendations,the company pursued efforts to build a resort and golf course at Mahukona. Though it secured zoning for the project, legal challenges by Citizens For Protection of the North Kohala Coastline delayed start of the project until 1999. Without securing subdivision for a scaled down version of the resort, the land ownership was transferred in foreclosure and the zoning expired. Kohala groups are continuing to raise funds to purchase the 434 acres makai of Akoni Pule Highway. In 1988, SENATE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 179 passed both houses of the State Legislature and called on governments to work together to ensure public view and open space along the coast and to discourage development makai of Akoni Pule Highway. In 1988, DLNR commissioned the study "NORTH KOHALA: PERCEPTIONS OF A CHANGING COMMUNITY", which indicated the intent of past state administrations and DLNR staff to preserve and protect the North Kohala Coast. Many Kohala residents participated in the study which stated that the North Kohala Coast has the most numerous and intact, pre- contact archeological and cultural sites in the state. L1 L LJ F7 1, In 1983, THE NORTH KOHALA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLAN, adopted by resolution by the County Planning Commission, which implements the General Plan for the North Kohala District, recommended for OPEN classification the entire length of the North Kohala Coast. In 1980 MAHUKONA PROPERTIES ANNOUNCED PLANS TO BUILD A MASSIVE RESORT LJ ON LANDS AT KAIHOLENA. Opposition to the plan by Kohala residents from the beginning intensified on the County Council through the 1990s when the developer withdrew the plans. 71 Opposition to the subdivision of the 263 acres of Kaiholena into six lots in 2000 failed to stop U, that action, but through persistence and the cooperation of the owner, community groups were able to raise $10.9 million through six sources to purchase all the lots. At a celebration of the last purchase in 2017 sixty six individuals were thanked specifically for their help, almost all North Kohala residents. In the 1980s HUI MAMALAHOA INTERVENED IN QUIET TITLE ACTION BY KOHALA CORPORATION (CASTLE&COOKE)TO PROVIDE COASTAL AND MOUNTAIN ACCESS AT KAPANAIA AND MAKAPALA. The Kohala group, led by Benjamin Raymond and Samson Cazimero, Sr.,was able to get the court to grant vehicular access to both locations, a move that eventually led to greater pedestrian access along the shoreline. In 1972, the DLNR study entitled "NORTH KOHALA, PRESERVATION OF HISTORICAL RESOURCES" indicated the intent of past state administrations and DLNR staff to preserve and protect the North Kohala Coast. In the early 1970s AKONI PULE HIGHWAY WAS CONSTRUCTED FROM KAWAIHAE TO Ell MAHUKONA. Alarm was raised by many of the Kohala residents participating in the construction about the large number of historic sites that were being impacted by the grading activity. Other residents, such as Kamaka Ai'a, William Akau and Henry Ross raised concerns P11 about the impact on the communities' open use of the leeward coast for fishing, gathering and LJ recreation, In 1964 AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL RECONNIASANCE OF THE MAHUKONA TO KAWAIHAE HIGHWAY was made by Lloyd J. Soehren that brought attention to the large amount of unsurveyed historic sites and burials along the coast. Several Kohala residents took steps to call for and begin studies aimed at their preservation. They also worked to change the rules and parameters for future archaeological surveys in anticipation of development. In 1963,the KOHALA-HAMAKUA REGIONAL GENERAL PLAN,which many residents of Kohala supported, stated that development and resorts should be concentrated in South Kohala and away from existing residential areas such as Hawi. No resort zoning was identified along the North Kohala Coast. Li Additionally, many important community organizations have continually offered their support to preserve the North Kohala Coast and have signed and supported the above petitions and letters and resolutions. These organizations include: 0 Kohala Kupuna Council 0 Kohala Filipina Association 0 Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club 11 Kohala Puerto Rican Club il Long time local merchants a a Again we want to thank the owner of Kohala Shoreline for his dedication to the environmental and archaeological study of his land. Our hope is that he will continue to not only listen to the voices of the community of North and South Kohala, but that he talk to us about the possibility of public purchase of this land. Malama Na Lihikai o Kohalanei, a Toni Withington a Cc: Geometrician Associates Kohala Shoreline LLC P.O. Box 396 c/o Carlsmith Ball Hilo HI 96721 121 Waianuenue Avenue Hilo HI 96720 a a a a 7 a a a a geometrician LJ ASSOCIATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808)969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 Toni Withington 1 1 Ka Makani 0 Kohala Ohana—Kako'o Li PO Box 76 (71 Hawi HI 96719 LJ Dear Ms. Withington: Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision, TMK 5-9-001:008,North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Ll Thank you for your comment letter dated June 7, 2019, on the Draft EA, which was addressed to Planning Director Michael Yee. As the author of the EA, I would like to respond to your comments. We recognize and appreciate the profound stewardship that you and other groups and individuals concerned with preserving not only public access but also the environment of North Kohala have exercised with regard to shoreline-adjacent developments. We appreciate the detailed summary record you provided concerning legal challenges, petitions, government resolutions, letters, and plans that sought to preserve the North Kohala Coast over the last 50 years, many of which were cited in the EA. The Final EA now cites your letter, reproduced in Appendix lb, as a source for readers,interested in this full list. It is important to note that the project as designed significantly enhances access to the Li extensive area makai of the Ala Loa. Through its density and design restrictions on setbacks, height, tree size, grading, landscaping and home appearance it largely preserves viewplanes and the open space feeling of the area, despite the fact that the property has been zoned urban for over two decades L and was designated in the CDP as"Existing Upscale Development". Thank you also for acknowledging the efforts of the landowner and various team members to study the environmental setting and reach out to the community for input, as well as adapt the project to certain of your Li concerns. It is acknowledged that not every concern your group had has been satisfied by the revised design. In answer to your specific comments: 1. The efforts of many generations of Kohala residents, both Native Hawaiians and others, conform to the definition of traditional cultural properties as found in the National Register Bulletin 38. "Traditional vehicular access" on this property has been in existence since ancient times but has been blocked by landowners. The prevention of traditional vehicular access needs to be recognized and assessed as a cultural impact. The cultural impact assessment was extremely proactive and thorough in properly documenting cultural resources and practices. Community has the common meaning of all the residents of any given area,but the use of the word"community" in the context of federal regulations and guidance documents in National Register Bulletin 38 is meant for an ethnic community. The testimonies of Drs. Liu and Crabbe cited in the CIA relative to modem development on or near traditional Hawaiian cultural sites and the relationship to multigenerational psychopathologies,trauma, and cultural disintegration were identified in the CIA as legitimate concerns that should be taken"into account when making land use decisions that might have unexpected long-term psychological effects on a particular cultural group within our modem-day multicultural society."The efforts put forth by the landowner to reduce the density of the development, keep the shoreline open for traditional cultural practices, and continue to consult and work with members of the affected community are strategies that have been identified in the CIA as having helped mitigate cultural impacts. The concerns of the North Kohala community in general have been appropriately considered in the context of social impacts. That does not imply that the concerns about access,whether pedestrian or vehicular, are any less valid to consider; they have been fully and thoughtfully considered in the EA. 2. Public vehicular access should be permitted within the property. Based on extensive communication with your group, native Hawaiians from the Kawaihae area,the National Park Service, and others, the project was completely redesigned to remove most internal roadways and allow only driveways to access the lots, the buildable sections of which are now all mauka of the Ala Loa. This large-scale retreat from vehicular access was done to minimize grading and runoff from impervious surfaces and protect coastal resources: water quality, fishing and gathering, dust control, and the enjoyment of a trail without vehicles and roads crossing it. To reconsider a mauka-makai vehicular access to the shoreline is counterproductive to making this an environmentally sound project. While we would dispute the assertion that vehicular access has been in existence since ancient times, the jeep road was used since perhaps as early as the 1930s, although primarily by the ranches and their employees in the early days. While it is true the ranch gated the mauka-makai vehicular access from Akoni Pule Highway, which has remained gated through the years,there has always been the ability to drive on the Ala Loa. The public enters from the State land on the north and drives across the property. The abandoned vehicle on the northern edge of Keawewai Gulch does prevent driving south to Kohala Kai. It is inaccurate to say the public has been restricted from the property when they can drive to within a few hundred feet of Waiaka'ilio Bay, the main shoreline recreation spot on a property that is primarily fringed by cliffs. The owner has never restricted the right of those fishing and gathering to wander the shoreline. Most importantly, however, rather than decreasing access, the proposed project actually improves access by creating a public parking lot and a mauka-makai pedestrian path that currently do not exist, and it also facilitates development of the Ala Kahakai. Vehicular access along the Ala Loa is not endorsed by Na Ala U Hele, the local native Hawaiian community or the owner. The owner and his consultants have been repeatedly told of the cultural and historical significance of this trail as a pedestrian access, and the archaeological studies have shown that sensitive archaeological resources are U present all along the trail. The National Park Service has indicated that they want the jeep road to become part of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail and do not want vehicles on it. 3. Possibility of public purchase of this land. To the owner's knowledge, the Kohala Shoreline property is not on the list of properties approved to be acquired by the open space fund, and there have been no requests of the owner by the County, land trusts or other organizations to acquire it through purchase or condemnation. The North Kohala CDP did not suggest purchasing this parcel as it did for Kukuipahu-Haena, Mahukona, PAo'o and Ka'iholena. Moreover, a beneficial and highly cost-effective result of the proposed 6-lot subdivision will be to enable public use of the entire area makai of the Ala Loa—the main part of the property that appears to have value for public use and access—with no public expenditure whatsoever. We very much appreciate your review of the document. The owner wishes to continue coordination _J with your organization through attendance at monthly meetings to share progress on the project and 0 F, i engage in dialogue, which has very much helped guide and improve the project. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 969-7090. n j Sincerely, n Ron Terry, Principal U Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee, Director, Hawaii County Planning Department Steven Lim, Partner, Carismith Ball LLP n Li LJl U U LJ i ' comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision, May 2019 by Cory Harden, Hilo 333cory@gmail.com Summary of comments It is commendable that the applicant has re-done the plans and DEA to respond to public concerns. Fewer lots, house setbacks, and public access measures are helpful. But, given the numerous archaeological sites and cultural significance of the area, I urge going further and exploring preserving the land using County Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resource Preservation (PONC) fund, as proposed by local people familiar with the cultural significance of the land. Measures to strengthen the PONC fund are currently being considered by the County Charter Commission and may be approved by voters in November 2020. One measure provides funds for a now staff position, which should speed up land acquisitions.so potential sellers are not left in limbo and paying property taxes for so long. This should also increase the County's ability to pull in funds from other sources to purchase land.A second measure would pay community people who care for the land. Economic impacts of this project are another major concern. There should be an estimate of how many Kohala residents, with almost one in five below poverty /eve/, will be able to afford these homes. i n Limited data is cited to support the questionable claim that high-end housing is a net benefit to the County. The applicant should find data that shows thathigh-priced homes occupied only part- time by off-island people reduce J • home prices on the island • the number of residents who leave the island because they can't afford to live here • the number of residents who require food stamps, welfare, and other assistance from government and non-government entities • homelessness Data should also be found to evaluate how much commitment part-time, off-island residents, U perhaps including celebrities, will have to preserving native Hawaiian culture, how they will influence political decisions on Hawail Island. CI Last research should be done on how sea level rise will affect the salinity of well water. Specific comments F1 Li SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Covenants will restrict homes to a height of 25 feet... DEA p. i1i Please include a commitment for covenants restricting heights to 15 feet to reduce instrusiveness on this special place. MITIGATION SUMMARY PUBLIC ACCESS AND RECREATION The project includes a four-stall public parking area that would be open from a half-hour before sunrise to a half-hour after sunset... DEA p. vi Provide data to show how many people visit the area, on average, on weekend days and holidays, and how many parking stalls are sufficient for that number. How much increase in use is expected after road access and parking are improved for the project?How many more parking stalls would be needed? To accommodate people who do night fishing,please include a commitment to keep the parking _J lot open at night. PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES 1. The owner will make fair share contributions to mitigate the potential regional impacts of the subdivision with respect to parks and recreation, fire, police,solid waste disposal facilities, and roads. 2.The owner will prepare a Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval. 3.The owner will make intersection improvements to be determined in consultation with the Department of Transportation. DEA p. vi Please include a commitment to abide by requirements given by governmental bodies for these issues. Ll PART 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS 1.1 Property Ownership and Project Location and Description C� The property is within the County's Special Management Area(SMA), and an SMA Use Permit application will be processed with the Hawai'i County Leeward Planning Commission(Planning Commission).A change of zone application from the current Single-Family Residential(RS-15)zoning district to the Residential and Agricultural(RA-5a)zoning district will be concurrently processed through the Planning Commission and the County Council. The*owner may or may not elect to pursue a variance, Planned Unit Development or any other administrative permit to modify road standards, lot sizes or other design elements during the subdivision or development process. DEA p. I Please include a commitment to have all administrative permits approved by the Planning Commission. The owner carefully considered the comments[on the 2015 DEA]and decided not to implement the project as proposed, and instead decided to design a new concept with substantial changes that responded to these concerns. E DEA p. I The effort to respond to concerns is commendable. IJ2.3 Alternatives Evaluated and Dismissed from Further Consideration ... If the proposed rezoning is not approved, the owner may in the future consider a higher-density development consistent with the current RS-15 zoning... DEA p. 14 If this occurs,given numerous concerns from the community about impacts on native Hawaiian culture and the natural environment, what actions is the community likely to take in response? F1 3.2 Socioeconomic and Cultural 3.2.1 Socioeconomic Characteristics Impacts some of the homes are expected to be occupied part-time by off-island residents. DEA p. 51 Provide data to demonstrate that high-priced homes occupied only part-time by off-island people reduce • home prices on the island the number of residents who leave the island because they can't afford to live here 0 the number of residents who require food stamps, welfare, and other assistance from II government and non-government entities homelessness isr Provide data to evaluate how much commitment part-time, off-island residents,perhaps including celebrities will have to preserving native Hawaiian culture, and how they will influence political decisions on Hawaii Island. Include information on Mark Zuckerberg's recent land purchase including kuleana land on Kauai. Mitigation Measures ...the applicant shall secure the concurrence of the Office of Housing and Community Development that the applicant's affordable housing requirements, if any have been mutually agreed to prior to Final Subdivision Approval. DEA p. 52 Specify the affordable housing requirements and cite the laws/guidelines being followed. Table 5. Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics D Percent Below Poverty Level...HawaN Island...18.3%...North Kohala...18.1% DEA p. 53 What percentage and number of people from North Kohala will be able to afford these homes? Impacts and Mitigation Measures The applicant will seek to dedicate an easement on each lot'makai of the ala loa/jeep road for the entire length of the property for public access,creating, in essence, a 50 to 250-foot wide"trail." DEA p. 56 This is commendable. Please add a commitment to doing this 3.2.2 Coastal Recreation ...the property is lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers. DEA p. 53 See comment for DEA p. vi, 3.2.3 Cultural Resources Cultural and Historical Background Dr. [Robert] Rechtman [author of the Cultural Impact Assessment]met with Kaena Peterson and Lei Kihoi... Both Kaena and Lei stressed the importance of maintaining the traditional access routes that exist on the landscape... DEA p. 65 Please give the same respect to the women as was given to Dr. Rechtman by using the women's last names. ...many more archaeological sites that were formerly[under the first EIS]slated for data recovery will now be formally preserved. DEA p.66 This is commendable. U Jojo also talked about a shoreline pond...Mr. Canon... expressed an interest in having community members take an active role... DEA p. 66 Please give the same respect to the woman as was given to Mr. Canon by using the woman's last name. The owner carefully considered the comments and decided not to implement the project as proposed and instead completely redesigned it to respond to these concerns. DEA p. 66 This is commendable. I L U _J i Both Diane and Cynthia expressed pleasure... DEA p. 67 Li See comment for p. 65. Both Diane and Cynthia expressed pleasure that the extreme coastal portion of the property will be F1 preserved but indicated that the best approach would be to preserve the whole property through a land purchase perhaps using County Public Access, Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission (PONC)funds. DEA p. 67 1 strongly support this. Measures to strengthen the PONC fund are currently being considered by the County Charter Commission and may be approved by voters in November 2020. One measure provides funds for a new staff position, which should speed up land acquisitions so potential sellers are not left in limbo and paying property taxes for so long. This should also increase the County's ability to pull in funds from other sources to purchase land. A second measure would pay community people who care for the land. Please describe the applicant's efforts to explore the PONC option and specific reasons for going, 0 or not going, that route. Kaena Peterson...also strongly urged the owner to keep the current six-lot plan and not change it later to higher density and make sure that future homeowners would not encroach on the trails,which to her are at the heart of cultural practice. DEA p. 67 The owner will continue to consult with the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program to fine-tune the public alignment of the Ala Kahakai in order to include features of the trail important for public use and enjoyment, as well as exclude certain significant features(e.g., burial sites)from public interaction. DEA p. 68 Shane Nelson of OHA's West Hawai'i office ... requested continued consultation with OHA when the El burial treatment and archaeological preservation plans become available. DEA p. 68 � Please include a formal commitment to carrying out the actions cited above. FU, 3.3 Infrastructure 3.3.1 Utilities, Energy, Public Facilities and Public Services Existing Utilities, Impacts and Mitigation Measures Ell Water will be provided to the project under an agreement with the Kohala Ranch Water Company... DEA p. 75 As sea level rise raises the level of brackish and saline water in the aquifer, how will the availability of fresh well water for the project be affected?How will this, in turn, affect project homeowners? 3.3 Infrastructure 3.3.1 Utilities, Energy, Public Facilities and Public Services In summary, considering fair-share contributions and real property and other tax contributions, the six-lot Kohala Shoreline, LLC development would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. DEA p. 78 See comment for p. 51. I L 3.3.2 Roadways and Traffic DEA p. 78 Describe the availability of alternatives to cars—buses, ride-share taxi, bicycles, etc. How well are nearby roads are designed to accommodate alternatives—bus stops, bike lanes, etc? How would someone without a car manage if living in this development? r (J 3.6 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies 3.6.3 Hawaii County Zoning and General Pian 3.6.5 Chapter 205A and Special Management Area There is a potential that some houses in the Project could be larger than 7,500 square feet in size. Per Hawai'i County SMA Rules, any proposal for a house greater than 7,500 feet must undertake an SMA Major Use Permit with the Planning Commission. 1� DEA p. 91 U Please commit to a limit of 3,000 square feet to reduce instrusiveness on this special place. ' I u i� I r7 1 L-11 J, geometrician Lill ASSOCIATES , LLC F1 integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808)969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 Cory Harden EVia email: 333cory@gmail.com Dear Mrs. Harden: i Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision,TMK 5-9-001:008,North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Thank you for your comment letter from May 2019 concerning the Draft EA. We appreciate your acknowledgment of the revision of the plans to respond to public concerns, including the fact that many archaeological sites that were formerly slated for data recovery will now be formally preserved. We do understand that you still have concerns and would prefer to see the land totally undeveloped. In answer to your specific comments: 1. Should explore preserving the land using County Public Access, Open Space, and Natural Resource Preservation (PONQ fund The owner understands that there are a few parties who believe that the full public ownership and use of this property would be worth the considerable investment that a purchase at fair market value would entail. The EA mentioned this opinion in several areas. It should be noted that this opinion has not been widespread enough to generate any nomination of the property for purchase. It is not an option that the owner wishes to pursue, although if the County advanced the idea formally through the nomination and selection process,the owner would certainly consider it. However, to the owner's knowledge,the Kohala Shoreline property is not on the list of properties to be acquired by the PONC fund, and there have been no requests to the owner by the County, land trusts or other organizations to acquire it through purchase or condemnation. The North Kohala CDP does not suggest purchasing this L parcel as it does for Kukuipahu-Haena, Mahukona, Pdo'o and Kaiholena. In terms of public use, a beneficial and highly cost-effective result of the proposed 6-lot subdivision will be to enable public use of the entire area makai of the Ala Loa—the main part of the property that Ll appears to have value for public use and access—with no public expenditure whatsoever. 2. Kohala residents will not be able to purchase the homes and they would not be affordable. Specify the affordable housing requirements and cite the laws/guidelines beingfollowed. It is acknowledged that the homes would have a high value and would not be affordable to the entire community. However,because the subdivision,involves five or more lots, the applicant would be required as part of the subdivision process to comply with the County's Affordable iL Housing Ordinance and to contribute to affordable housing in the region. This information has been added to the Final EA. 3. Claim that high-end housing is a net benefit to the County is questionable. People, including celebrities, living in part-time homes may not be committed to preserving native Hawaiian L n culture and may try to influence political decisions. The benefit to the County reported in the EA is fiscal only. Second homes of high value have been reliably shown to provide high property tax revenues, and their residents demand less services than most other residents in the County. In addition, construction and maintenance of these homes provide well-paying jobs to local residents. Personal beliefs of potential future homeowners should not require examination in an EA or any other land use approval process. In any case, the owner of the property has donated generously to local educational institutions, as may other future residents of the proposed six-lot subdivision. 4. Salinity of well water. In high slope, high elevation areas such as Kohala, it is expected that the water table will rise along with sea level, with fresh water continuing to perch atop saltwater. The position of the pump can be adjusted within the well shaft to adjust to this change. This is not the case in low-lying islands such as atolls, where freshwater aquifers can essentially disappear. 5. Please include a commitment for covenants restricting heights to 15feet to reduce intrusiveness on this special place. Please note that the zoning allows a maximum height of 35 feet. The proposed condition is to limit homes to 25 feet, 70 percent of the normal maximum. 15-foot maximum heights are unreasonably low and unnecessary in this con'text, where existing and future trees will often be 35 feet in height. 25-foot tall homes will not be intrusive. 6. [From the Draft EAJ: "The property is lightly used by fishermen, shellfish gatherers, and hikers. Provide data to show how many people visit the area, on average, on weekend days and holidays, and how many parking stalls are sufficient for that number. How much increase in use is expected after road access and parking are improved for the project?How many more parking stalls would be needed? There is currently very little use of the area because there is no parking lot, and the shoreline conditions—cliffs and dense kiawe vegetation—are not ideal for recreation. The 4-stall parking lot at the adjacent Kohala Kai is rarely full. Please note that the proposed public access facilities on the property is not meant to promote as much public use as possible, but rather to reasonably accommodate coastal access, especially access to the Ala Kahakai. The proposed access will be just one of many along the coastline, including accesses on the properties immediately to the north and south. 7. To accommodate people who do night fishing, please include a commitment to keep the parking lot open at night. No restriction on night fishing is proposed, only on onsite parking access, for security purposes. This is a reasonable condition and similar to others in the area,even at Hapuna Beach State Recreation Area. Lateral access to the major fishing spot on the coastline, at Waiaka'ilio Bay,can easily occur from the State land directly to the north. 8. Assurances that there will be fair share contributions to mitigate the potential regional impacts Fl of the subdivision with respect to parks and recreation,fire,police, solid waste disposal, facilities and roads; Solid Waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval; intersection improvements to be determined in consultation with the Department of Transportation. All of these commitments will be required as conditions of the Change of Zone H approval, Special Management Area Use Pen-nit and/or Subdivision Approval. The owner understands and is committed to all of these, but most importantly, there are requirements of F government officials to ensure that these commitments are not only made but enforced. 9. Please include a commitment to have all administrative permits approved by the Planning Commission. The owner is bound by laws and rules governing the consideration and approval of any administrative permit and is not at liberty to vary from these requirements. 10. [From the Draft EA]:"If the proposed rezoning is not approved, the owner may in the future consider a higher-density development consistent with the current RS-15 zoning.... "If this occurs, given numerous concerns from the community about impacts on native Hawaiian culture and the natural environment, what actions is the community likely to take in response? Although it is hard to predict attitudes and reactions in the future,based on input received to date, it is expected that public response to a development with higher density would be highly negative. Aside from the owner's personal preference to have a low-density development, this was a key reason to seek to downzone the property. 11. Please add a commitment related to the EA's statement that the applicant will seek to dedicate an easement on each lot makai of the ala loaljeep road for the entire length of the property for public access, creating, in essence, a 50 to 250 foot wide "trail. As with other proposed mitigation and design measures,the applicant is already committed to this idea. It is expected that the Planning Commission, County Council and Planning Department will evaluate these ideas and if they agree with them, adopt them as conditions as the proposal moves forward.The owner expects–and welcomes–the public to police the process to ensure that these are not "paper commitments." 1 2. "Dr. [Robert]Rechtman[author of the Cultural Impact Assessment]met with Kaena Peterson and Lei Kihoi... Both Kaena and Lei stressed the importance of maintaining the traditional access routes that exist on the landscape... " "Jo/o also talked about a shoreline pond...Mr. Canon... expressed an interest in having community members take an active role... " Please give the same respect to the women as was given to Dr. Rechtman by using the women's last names. We have revised the naming convention in the EA and tried to call all consultees by Ell their title (Mr. or Ms.)and their last names. 13. [From the Draft EAJ: "Kaena Peterson...also strongly urged the owner to keep the current six- lot plan and not change it later to higher density and make sure that future homeowners would Li not encroach on the trails, which to her are at the heart of cultural practice. " "The owner will continue to consult with the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program to fine-tune the public alignment of the Ala Kahakai in order to include features of the trail important for public use and enjoyment, as well as exclude certain significant features (e.g., burial sites) from public interaction. "Please include aformal commitment to carrying out the actions cited above. As with other proposed mitigation and design measures, the applicant is already committed to this idea. It is expected that the Planning Commission, County Council and Planning Department will adopt these commitments into conditions as the proposal moves forward. 14.Shane Nelson of OHA's West Hawaii office ... requested continued consultation with OHA when the burial treatment and archaeological preservation plans become available. Please L include aformal commitment to carrying out the actions cited above. OHA is required to be formally consulted as part of these plans. Without OHA consultation, SHPD and the Burial Council would not allow the plans to go forward. SHPD requires consultation with OHA in the preparation of Burial Treatment and Preservation Plans that address sites considered significant under state Criterion e(for cultural significance), and such consultation will occur during the development of the revised Burial Treatment and Archaeological Preservation Plans. 15. Describe the availability of alternatives to cars—buses, ride-share taxi, bicycles, etc. How well are nearby roads are designed to accommodate alternatives—bus stops, bike lanes, etc.? How would someone without a car manage if living in this development? A six-lot subdivision is not meant to be a self-sustaining community,with all the amenities that a city requires. All the modes you mention–buses, ride-share, taxis, bicycles, etc., are available, although, like for the vast majority of American and Big Island outlying subdivisions, it is expected that most travel for the foreseeable future will be in passenger motor vehicles and light trucks. The advantage of utilizing this property for a subdivision is that it is already urban zoned, adjacent to several other large and small developments, and is thus better positioned to take advantage of changes in transportation as they emerge. Although a person who did not have a car might not necessarily care to live in this community,there are many available lots closer to a central F1 urban environment that might be more suitable. 16. Please commit to a limit of 3,000 square feet to reduce intrusiveness on this special place. Even if the six homes are all larger than 3,000 square feet, their footprint will be small within the context of a nearly 38-acre parcel, where the terrain and vegetation will obscure even large houses. It would be unreasonable and accomplish no critical environmental goal to limit the homes to this figure. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 969-7090. Sincerely, Ron Terry, Principal Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee, Director, Hawaii County Planning Department Steven Lim, Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP Susan Wells Fischer P.O. Box 44417 Kawaihae, Hawaii 96743 June 7, 2019 Michael Yee, Director Planning Department, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Subject: Draft Environmental Assessment, Kohala Shoreline LLC Subdivision TMK: 5-9-001:008 Kahuali'ili'i (Kahua 1), North Kohala ILI, Dear Director Yee, After review of the various sections of the EA that focused on the subjects included in El my attached August 7, 2015 letter, I found that the EA- Addressed: House sites mauka of Ala Loa Sediment basins F1 Consistent 150'building setback from the highway U, Somewhat addressed: Access moved more north than at least one of the previous plans Disregarded: Interior connections or loops Viewplanes- reducing tree heights along highway sightlines SMA Permit 379, Condition 7 vehicular drop off and pick up Thank you for this opportunity to comment. Sincerely, Susan Wells Fischer Cc: Geometrician Associates P.O. Box 396, Hilo HI 96721 Kohala Shoreline LLC c/o Carlsmith Ball 121 Waianuenue Avenue, Hilo HI 96720 Susan Wells Fischer P.O. Box 44417 Kawaihae, Hawaii 96743 August 7, 2015 Page 1 of 2 County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline LLC Project TMK: 5-9-001:008 Kahualiili'i (Kahua 1), North Kohala We appreciate this opportunity to comment on the Draft EA for the Kohala Shoreline project. I have been a resident of Kohala Estates since 1976, and enjoy hiking the trails along our coastline, including on the subject property. My comments on the EA F1 are in four areas. BUILDING SITES - Makai of the Ala Loa The EA proposes house sites makai or oceanside of the Ala Loa historic trail. L The 37.88 acre parcel has sufficient land area mauka or above the Ala Loa for building sites for the nine lots. No building site should be allowed less than 100 feet from the shoreline. 160 feet from the Akoni Pule Highway U The EA cites the building sites to be setback from the highway by 150 feet on the project map, yet cites the setback from the highway as 100 feet in several places in the text. The building setbacks from the highway should be consistent at 150 feet. J The North Kohala Community Development Plan (NK CDP) calls for viewplane protection from Akoni Pule Highway. The EA calls 25 foot maximum height homes in earth colors which will help the views, but more noticeable will be the height of trees. Tree heights should also be limited to 25 feet, within 250 feet of the highway. 11 MULTIPLE ENTRANCES - Kohala Estates, Kohala Ranch, Kohala by the Sea, Kohala Waterfront all have single U accessways onto Akoni Pule Highway. Kailapa, toward Kawaihae has a single access, but a second is partially in place for future development of Hawaiian H Homelands. LJ Page 2 of 2 For residents driving by this area daily, single accessways to each subdivision are advantageous. For emergencies and circulation, multiple entrances connected by a Ll loop are advantageous. The multiple entrances of Kohala Kai have added three intersections with no connecting loop. The configuration proposed for Kohala Shoreline adds two more entrances off the highway, again with no internal connection. E If two entrances are allowed for Kohala Shoreline, they should be connected with a loop. U SEDIMENT BASINS - R Drywells on this hillside have been shown to fill with sediment, sometimes in one storm U event, to the point where they are ineffective and even difficult to locate. Sediment or infiltration basins in Kohala Estates have proven to be more cost-effective to install and have required no maintenance. The NK CDP calls for rural infrastructure and low- U tech, more sustainable, methods of infrastructure. The EA lists infiltration areas as a possibility. The NK CDP encourages developers to include more effective rural approaches rather than industrial high cost, high maintenance methods such as Ell drywells. ACCESS - The 1997 SMA for the subject property was very clear on public vehicular mauka- makai road access, 24 hours a day for drop off and pick up, and provisions for Ell disabled persons to park near the lateral shoreline access. r--� Access through the State land to the north of Kohala Shoreline is not assured. The U1, road is blocked by a damaged guardrail and several boulders. The highway shoulder is unsafe for parking. F,1, Li The community would be best served by mauka-makai access farther from the existing access at the boundary with Kohala Kai, and closer to Waiakailio Bay near the State boundary. Public parking near the shoreline and along the boundary with Kohala Kai would be a second-best alternative. Thank you. Sincerely, Susan Wells Fischer Cc: Geometrician Associates P.O. Box 396 Hilo HI 96721 geometrician ASSOC IATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808) 969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 Susan Wells Fischer P.O. Box 44417 Kawaihae HI 96743 Dear Ms. Fischer: Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision, TMK 5-9-001:008, North Kohala, Island of Hawai'V n U Thank you for your comment letter dated June 7, 2019, on the Draft EA, attaching your letter from 2015 in response to the Draft EA for a previous proposal on the property and comparing the outcome. In answer to your specific comments: 1. Suggestions that the current project incorporated in its design or mitigation. Thank you very U much, for systematically identifying the design improvements made in the current proposal. 2. Public access moved north. The location of the public access was moved to the proposed location because 1) a large majority of the parties consulted wanted it at the north end; 2) it Ll needed to be co-located with one of the permitted accesses on the highway, as DOT indicated it would not provide another access; and 3) it could utilize an existing trail for access to the Ala Loa, which was a desire of cultural consultees. 3. Interior connections or loops. These would not be feasible given the much fewer number of lots and the great expense of building bridges(rather than culverts,which for environmental reasons are being avoided as much as practical) over the gulches. 4. Viewplanes and tree heights. The proposed 35-foot height limit for newly planted trees matches the existing kiawe landscape. 5. 1997 SMA conditions for public vehicular mauka-makai road access, 24-hour a day drop off U and pick up and disabled access near shoreline. The 1997 SMA was for a truly urban, 50-lot development with modem streets that went right to the shoreline. The current proposal is only 12% of that density and has dispensed with any internal roads. Even residents will not be able to drive to or near the shoreline. This has the advantage of creating a very low-key development that preserves the wilderness quality of all the land from the Ala Loa makai. The large-scale retreat from vehicular access was done to minimize grading and runoff from impervious surfaces and protect coastal resources: water quality, fishing and gathering, dust control, and the enjoyment of a trail without vehicles and roads crossing it. To reconsider a mauka-makai vehicular access to the shoreline is counterproductive to making this an LJ environmentally sound project. It is also important to note that rather than decrease access, the proposed project actually improves it by creating a public parking lot and a mauka-makai pedestrian path that currently do not exist. Vehicular access along the Ala Loa is not endorsed by Na Ala Hele, the local native Hawaiian community or the owner. The owner and his consultants have been repeatedly told of the cultural and historical significance of this trail as a pedestrian access, and the archaeological studies have shown that sensitive archaeological resources are present all along the trail. The Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail has indicated that they want the jeep road to become part of their trail system and do not want vehicles on it. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 969-7090. Sincerely, A, J Ron Terry, Principal Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee,Director, Hawaii County Planning Department Steven Lim, Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP Harry Kim ....... Theresa Donham,Chair i Mayor Geraldine Bell,Vice Chair Alex Akau Benjamin Heloca Kilohana Hirano ti Christine Wada County of Hawaii PLANNING DEPARTMENT CULTURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION Aupuni Center - 101Pauahi Street,Suite 3 - Hilo,Hawaii 96720 R Phone(808)961-8288 Fax(808)961-8742 June 6,2019 Mr. Michael Yee, Director F Hawaii County Planning Department I L ' 101 Pauahi St., Ste. 3 Hilo,HI 96720 Dear Mr. Yee: SUBJECT: Request for Comments on the Draft Environmental Assessment for the Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC Location: North Kohala District, Hawaii Island TMK: (3)5-9-001:008 The Hawaii County Cultural Resources Commission(CRC)reviewed the subject proposal at their meeting on May 21, 2019, to provide comments and recommendations on the proposed project. The meeting was attended by Hawaii County Planning staff, and an agent for the applicant who gave a presentation on the proposed project to the CRC. Based on the information and discussion at the meeting several recommendations and comments r on the proposed project were given, and are presented below. A majority of the discussion and i Li comments related to the public access trails, as well as mauka to makai access through the parcel from the main road to the shoreline. Other discussions related to the preservation and protection of the cultural sites,and specific buffer zones for each of the sites within the proposed subdivision. LJ The following comments and recommendations should be included as an update to the Draft EA; the CRC requests that these comments be incorporated in the Final EA to ensure the CRC's recommendations will be considered during project development: 1) An Archeoloizical Data Recovery Plan (pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-278-3) should be prepared by the applicant, and approved by the State Historic LJ Preservation Division(SHPD),prior to the issuance of a Special Management Area(SMA) Use Permit by the Leeward Planning Commission; HaivaVi County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer platinitn�(,i.co.liawiii.hi.tis if Michael Yee, Director Hawaii County Planning Department Page 2 June 6, 2019 2) A Burial Treatment Plan, in accordance with HAR §13-300, shall be completed and approved by the SHPD prior to the issuance of a SMA Use Permit by the Leeward Planning Commission; 3) The CRC is requesting that the buffer zones around archeological sites that were shown during the presentation be revised to ensure that public trails, subdivision development, and residential development do not impact these sites, and that the buffer zones are sufficient to ensure protection of these sites; 4) The CRC observed that a number of historic properties designated for preservation are not depicted on the Site Plan provided in the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA). The CRC requests that the applicant ensure that the Site Plan, and all future maps, accurately depict all of the preservation sites and areas within the project boundaries. 5) The CRC is recommending that metes and bounds measurements of all site preservation easements located throughout the project area be recorded with the State of Hawaii Bureau of Conveyances (BOC), along with applicable covenants to ensure future lots owners do not impact or alter any historical,cultural or archeological sites. The CRC encourages the applicant to continue working to ensure that significant archeological and cultural sites located on this parcel are preserved, managed and protected in perpetuity. Additionally, the CRC would like to ensure that the future owners of the proposed lots understand their rights and responsibilities with regards to buffer zones, public access, and native rights. The CRC appreciates the applicant working to balance the proposed development with the sensitive natural and cultural resources on the subject parcel. The CRC invites the applicant or Planning Director to further consult with this body relating to the above recommendations should they be incorporated into any permits for this proposed project. The CRC appreciates the opportunity to consult with you on the proposed project. Should you have any questions regarding the consultation, please contact CRC staff member Alex J. Roy at (808)961-8140 or at alcx.roy@Zliawaiicounty,goy, Me ke aloha, THERESA K. DONHAM,Chairperson Hawaii County Cultural Resources Commission AJR:klt \er6projects\kohala shoreline subdiv.and rezone trnk 590010081crc-letter-to W-kslIc-cornments-002(1).doem cc via email: Cultural Resources Commission Mr. Greg Mooers 1 F geometrician ASSOCIATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808)969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 j Theresa K. Donham,Chairperson Hawaii County Cultural Resources Commission c/o Michael Yee, Planning Director Hawaii County Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Ms. Donham: - Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision,TMK 5-9-001:008,North Kohala, Island of Hawaii i ; Thank you for your comment letter dated June 6, 2019,on the Draft EA. In answer to your specific comments: + i 1. An Archeological Data Recovery Plan should be prepared by the applicant, and approved by the (SHPD prior to the issuance of a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit by the Leeward Planning Commission. With the understanding that successful completion of this plan will be a condition of approval of the SMA, and that final SMA approval would not be issued until the plan is prepared and approved by SHPD, the owner agrees to this recommendation. ; 2. A Burial Treatment Plan shall be completed and approved by the SHPD prior to the issuance a_ of a SMA Use Permit by the Leeward Planning Commission. With the understanding that successful completion of this plan will be a condition of approval of the SMA, and that final SMA approval would not be issued until the pian is prepared and approved by SHPD, the owner agrees to this recommendation. 3. The CRC is requesting that the buffer zones around archeological sites that were shown during the presentation be revised to ensure that public trails, subdivision development, and residential development do not impact these sites, and that the buffer zones are sufficient to ensure protection of these sites. The conceptual plan shown at the meeting was for information purposes only and the final development plan will be revised to clarify that no land uses impact these sites and there will be no conflict with approved buffer zones. 4. The CRC observed that a number of historic properties designated for preservation are not depicted on the Site Plan provided in the Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA). The CRC ' requests that the applicant ensure that the Site Plan, and all future maps, accurately depict all of the preservation sites and areas within the project boundaries. The Site Plan presented in the Draft EA was for illustration purposes and not every feature was depicted. The Site Plan for the Final EA has been amended to show all preservation sites and features, as practical for an illustration at this scale. All future Site Plans for the SMA and Change of Zone and the final j 1 J maps used for development will be updated to ensure that all preservation sites, including buffer zones as they are developed and refined, are shown. S. The CRC is recommending that metes and bounds measurements of all site preservation easements located throughout the project area be recorded with the State ofHawai'i Bureau of Conveyances, along with applicable covenants to ensure future lots owners do not impact or alter any historical, cultural or archeological sites. This will occur. The metes and bounds maps will assist in developing the conceptual maps presented in the EA into final maps that will assist the landowners and the County in clearly delineating the sites and buffers to ensure protection. 6. The CRC encourages the applicant to continue working to ensure that significant archeological and cultural sites located on this parcel are.preserved, managed and protected in perpetuity. Additionally, the CRC would like to ensure that the future owners of the proposed lots understand their rights and responsibilities with regards to buffer zones,public access, and native right. The CRC appreciates the applicant working to balance the proposed development with the sensitive natural and cultural resources on the subject parcel. The CRC invites the applicant or Planning Director to further consult with this body relating to the above recommendations should they be incorporated into any permits for this proposed project. The applicant welcomes further assistance from and consultation with the CRC. LJi We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 969-7090. Sincerely, Ron Terry, Principal Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee, Director, Hawaii County Planning Department Steven Lim,Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP r United States Department of the Interior NATIONAL PARK SERVICE Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail ? 734786 Kanalani St.,Suite 14 IN REPLY REFER TO: Kailua-Kana,HI 46740 June 6;2019 Michael Yee Director of Planning Hawaii County Planning Dept. 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Fi Hilo,HI 96720 (_J RE: Draft Environmental Assessment Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision: Kahuali'ili'i - (Kahua 1),North Kohala,Island&County of Hawaii.TMK(3)5-9-001:008 f� To Whom it may concern: j Thank you for providing the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail with the opportunity to submit comments on the DEA for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision,Kahuali'ili'i,North Kohala, Island&County of Hawaii. TMK(3)5-9-001:008 The National Park Service(NPS)administers the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail(NHT), added to the National Trails System by the U.S.Congress on November 13,2000(Public Law ' 106-509). In January 2009,the Ala Kahakai NHT Comprehensive Management Plan(CMP)and EIS were adopted as policy and listed in the Federal Register.The legislation authorizing the Ala Kahakai NHT identifies an approximately 175-mile portion of prehistoric ala loa, and other -J trails on or parallel to the seacoast extending from Upolu Point on the northern tip of Hawaii Island down the west coast of the island around South Point to the east boundary of Hawaii Volcanoes National Park.The Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail combines surviving elements -' of the ala loa with segments of later alanui aupuni, which was developed on or parallel to traditional routes,mauka-makai trails,and more recent pathways and roads that create links " !' between the historic segments.The preservation and protection of natural and cultural resources -' and landscapes,as well as viewscapes,are vital to the mission of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail. LJ Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail was established to administer the preservation and protect, reestablish as necessary,and maintain the ancient coastal ala loa and associated resources and j values,along with linking trails on or parallel to the shoreline. The goal is to provide high quality experience,enjoyment and education guided by Native Hawaiian protocol and etiquette while protecting the trail's natural and cultural heritage and respecting private and community interests.The 175 mile trail corridor includes those trails found within the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project area, The National Park Service thanks the applicant for recognizing Ala Kahakai NHT in the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project DEA. The Ala Loa as it passes through Kohala Shoreline LLC Project �l area is the preferred north-south route within Kahuali'ili'i for the Ala Kahakai NHT program. The project area is home to a wide array of cultural and natural resources that include the remains of a significant prehistoric Hawaiian village,later referred to as the Waiakailio Bay Complex. In the winter,residents and visitors enjoy the ocean views including humpback whales that frequent the nearshore waters.The shoreline is frequented by many residents for the abundance of marine life that is present,and that for some,has sustained their families for generations.This is a special place. It is with intent to preserve and protect the natural and cultural resources,as well as the lifestyles of the residents of Hawaii Island,that we are providing the following comments and concerns regarding the DEA. t Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail and other ancient and Historic Trail Site 29271 -The Ala Loa r Regarding Site 29271,the Ala Loa,the DEA discusses the trail as the probable main route of the Ala Kahakai NHT through the project area.The DEA also discusses future collaboration between the applicant and the National Park Service,State of Hawaii,and the community regarding the future of the trail: The owner will work with representatives from the federal Ala Kahakai NHT,the State's Na Ala Hele Trail&Access program,and the North Kohala Community Access L Group to have the Ala Kahakai Trail constructed,presumably on the existing ala loa/jeep road, with appropriate adjustments to provide buffers for burial sites that the jeep road currently intrudes upon.Ala loa alignment provides ample area for construction, maintenance and use of the Ala Kahakai. This trail alignment, expected to be 10 feet in width in conformance with both the design standards of the Ala Kahakai and j Chapter 34 of the Hawaii County Code, will insure continued public access to and utilization of shoreline resources. (p55-56,emphasis added) �- The ala loa,or jeep road which is considered the main route of the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail has been deemed an archeological site(State Site 29271A).This trail should remain unmolested until such time that SHPD and the Native Hawaiian community deem any actions necessary. Ala Kahakai NHT requests that the forthcoming archaeological preservation plan should address any proposed actions regarding modification of the existing trail fabric or route.The preservation plan should also include buffers associated with the trail,consistent with treatment of the ala loa in the adjacent Kohala Kai subdivision. Site 29271C As described in the Updated AIS(Appendix 4,p.49), "Feature C seems to represent the location of the ala loa just prior to the construction of the 1940s Jeep road". Site 29271 C is most likely the only remnant section of the original ala loa on the subject property.This section has the same characteristics as the intact sections of ala loa in the State of Hawaii lands to the north,as well as in the coastal section of Kawaihae 1,below Kailapa,Hawaiian Homesteads. 2 Site 29271 C is located directly mauka of Site 4004. Site 4004,Feature E,is the boundary wall �f for Site 4004.The wall was most likely damaged when the ala loa was being converted for use as a jeep road,or as postulated by Graves and Cassebeer(1993)during fire suppression activities. Therefore,the section of 29271 A that goes through Site 4004 is most likely not the original route of the ala loa.The original ala loa most likely skirted Site 4004 on the mauka side as evidence j indicates with Site 29271C. To avoid the burials within Site 4004,the applicant should consider connecting the jeep trail to the north and to the south around the mauka side of Site 4004. Ala Kahakai NHT would like the opportunity to work with the applicant,SHPD,the County of Hawaii,Na Ala Hele,and the community to restore this section of trail. Mauka-Makai Trails Site 15261,includes three trailstsegments,a,b,&c.These trails are not included on all site plan maps with the other preservation sites.Please include all three trails on all maps so as to not confuse the readers.This is especially important when illustrating buildable areas on lots,for example,Lot 1 &2 in the archaeological report and the cultural impact assessment show the j trails highlighted in blue and as preservation sites(EA p. 72,Fig. 10;CIA p. 8,Fig. 9(6/01/18); AIS p.28,Fig. 16),while on figures in the EA,the project's conceptual site plan(p. 5,Fig.3),the B&K Design,Concepts for Erosion and Sediment Control,Overall Site Plan Graphic(Appendix 5,p. 1 (04/15/19)),and the Water Resource Impact Assessment(Appendix 7,p. 3)do not illustrate any of the trail segments as preservation areas(See attached Figure 1). � f Ala Kahakai NHT requests that all Site 15261 trail segments be preserved as stated in the AIS and CIA and that all trail segments be illustrated on all future site plans in the FEA. - As for the mauka-maker pedestrian access trail, Site 15261A,if the proposed project is accepted, , Ala Kahakai NHT will look forward to working with the applicant to connect the historic trail to the parking lot in a safe and meaningful way. Z_ Project Resource Procurement Within the mission statement for the Kohala Shoreline LLC,the applicant states: 1_- "Natural materials such as wood and stone will be sustainably harvested, and all manufactured materials used will be environmentally sensitive."(p. 2,emphasis added) The State of Hawaii's coastal lands north of the project area have been,and are currently being, j illegally quarried without permits to supply the growing needs of development in North and South Kohala(See attached Figure 2).Historic sites,the cultural landscape,and in known cases r—a prehistoric sections of the ala loa are being systematically dismantled to supply the highly desired field stones of Kohala. Please detail how and from where will stone be harvested.Ala Kahakai NHT recommends that j the project ensures that any stone used for proposed retaining walls or boundary walls be ` procured from legal quarry sites. u 3 In summary While the Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail is pleased to see the downsizing of the project from the previous 2015 Kohala Shoreline LLC Draft Environmental Assessment to the current 6- Lot Subdivision alternative,we would like to honor the ongoing 50 year effort by the Kohala Community to preserve the lands makai of Akoni Pule Highway. The current DEA states that "The owner does not envision any other development scenarios that could reasonably satisfy its objectives and vision, or the property, and therefore none are advanced or analyzed"(p. 14).The DEA did not list what alternatives where entertained. With i ' that said,Ala Kahakai NHT suggests that a no-development alternative be entertained which J includes.the possibility of public acquisition of the entire project area,or an alternative which allows the creation a lot that includes a portion of the project area that would house the majority of the cultural sites,including the ala loa within Kahuali'ili'i for public purchase or a conservation easement.This alternative would allow the Native Hawaiian community and others the opportunity to steward and not sever their connections to this important cultural landscape �7 while the owner benefits from the income from the sales of the lot to thepublic. Again,the National Park Service thanks the applicant for recognizing Ala Kahakai NHT in the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project DEA.Ala Kahakai NHT is looking forward to working with the landowners and communities of North and South Kohala to initiate managed access along this unique and important section of the Ala Kahakai NHT corridor. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. We look forward to our continuing communication on this proposed project.Please contact me, 808-326-6012 ext.101,or our n resource staff archeologist,Rick Gmirkin,at ext. 102 to discuss any questions you may have on iL' our comments. Sincerely, Aric Arakaki Superintendent L cc: Mr Ron Terry,Geometrician Associates Mr. Steven Lim,Kohala Shoreline,LLC State of Hawaii,DLNR,Department of Forestry and Wildlife,Na Ala Hele State of Hawaii,DLNR, State Historic Preservation Division Office of Hawaiian Affairs NPS Pacific West Region 4 a u e E. b w • v ' a, 4. j �� ��'� 4 ay� I ar�'.y a! g��r���� '�e o N�•�a�y`✓"� ,�� ^ "$mW """4�"" ��"^ ter?' d��`� "° �.^ , �'P'3" ` �,• � � •'ter" e r�� +�° e1 �' " �.� ,�.an syf ar4^�.r ev`�' d � •J'p`ntµ �°� �y, � aYr I "FR a"v M r � Figure 1.Lot I &2 from CIA Figure 9 which includes Site 15261 trail sents overlayed on Design overall site plan(Appendix 5,p. 1)which includes buildable lot areas(in yellow). �w A' � � u ur wx n � rz r � W ti s.P V Figure 2®Note retaining walls at neighboring Kohala Waterfront i i geometrician � r ASSOCIATES , LLC integrating geographic science and planning phone: (808)969-7090 PO Box 396 Hilo Hawaii 96721 rterry@hawaii.rr.com July 19, 2019 Arik Arakaki, Superintendent National Park Service Ala Kahakai National Historic Trail 73-4786 Kanalani Street, Suite 14 Kailua-Kona HI 96740 Dear Mr. Arakaki: Subject: Comment to Draft Environmental Assessment for Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision, TMK 5-9-001:008,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii Thank you for your comment letter dated June 6, 2019,on the Draft EA. In answer to your specific U comments: 1. Site 29271 - The Ala Loa This trail should remain unmolested until such time that SHPD and the Native Hawaiian community deem any actions necessary. Ala Kahakai NHT requests that r the forthcoming archaeological preservation plan should address any proposed actions regarding modification of the existing trail fabric or route. The preservation plan should also include buffers associated with the trail, consistent with treatment of the ala loa in the adjacent Kohala Kai subdivision. The preservation plan will include buffers along the trail, similar to those of Kohala Kai, 2. The section of 29271A that goes through Site 4004 is most likely not the original route of the ala loa. The original ala loa most likely skirted Site 4004 on the mauka side as evidence indicates with Site 29271 C. To avoid the burials within Site 4004, the applicant should consider connecting the jeep trail to the north and to the south around the mauka side of Site 4004. Ala Kahakai NHT would like the opportunity to work with.the applicant, SHPD, the County of Hawaii, Na Ala Hele, and the community to restore this section of trail. The applicant is agreeable to this suggestion and will propose it during its discussions with your organization and other trail groups as part of the preservation planning and trail design. 3. Site 15261 includes three trailslsegments, a, b, & c. These trails are not included on all site plan maps with the other preservation sites. Please include all three trails on all maps so as to not confuse the readers. This is especially important when illustrating buildable areas on lots, for example, Lot I & 2 in the archaeological report and the cultural impact assessment show the trails highlighted in blue and as preservation sites), while on figures in the EA, the project's conceptual site plan, the B&K Design, Concepts for Erosion and Sediment Control, Overall Site Plan Graphic, and the Water Resource Impact Assessment do not illustrate any of the trail segments as preservation areas. Ala Kahakai NHT requests that all Site 15261 trail segments be preserved as stated in the AIS and CIA and that all trail segments be illustrated on all future J LJ site plans in the FEA. The trail segments you refer to are various locations of the same mauka- makai trail, and it is unreasonable and unnecessary to preserve all of them. Preserving one alignment fulfills the mitigation requirements of the archaeological inventory survey, satisfies the cultural goals or providing mauka-makai access on a traditional pathway, and is a reasonable approach. 4. As for the mauka-makai pedestrian access trail, Site 15261A, if the proposed project is accepted, Ala Kahakai NHT will look forward to working with the applicant to connect the historic trail to the parking lot in a safe and meaningful way. The applicant looks forward to working with your organization and trail groups to develop the trail with sensitivity to its LJ archaeological, cultural and access value. 5. Please detail how and from where will stone be harvested Ala Kahakai NHT recommends that the project ensures that any stone used for proposed retaining walls or boundary walls be procured from legal quarry sites. The reason the applicant explicitly made the commitment to harvest stone and wood sustainably in the mission statement is that he recognizes that some wall builders in the State do not obtain proper permits and permissions and even dismantle historic sites. This commitment to obtain stone only from legal sources will remain through the entire project and will be repeated in the project's CC&Rs. 6. "The owner does not envision any other development scenarios that could reasonably satisfy its objectives and vision for the property, and therefore none are advanced or analyzed"(P. 14). The DEA did not list what alternatives where entertained. With that said, Ala Kahakai NHT suggests that a no-development alternative be entertained which includes the possibility of public acquisition of the entire project area, or an alternative which allows the creation a lot that includes a portion of the project area that would house the majority of the cultural sites, including the ala loa within Kahudli'ili'ifor public purchase or a conservation easement. This alternative would allow the Native Hawaiian community and others the opportunity to steward and not sever their connections to this important cultural landscape while the owner benefits from the income from the sales of the lot to the public. "The NPS confuses the obligations of private landowners regarding development of their property with their own funds with the obligations of a public agency using public lands and public funds to meet the agency's specified public purpose and need. The proposed action and the no action alternative are fully L covered in the document. Many people have had various and sundry ideas concerning what the —I owner could or should do with the land. While the owner has been open to considering all suggestions,it is his right to advance alternatives, and he cannot be forced to examine and then implement development alternatives that are wholly outside his intentions for the property. This includes the public purchase alternative. This is not an alternative that the owner currently desires for his property. While others have made the suggestion, to the owner's knowledge, the Kohala Shoreline property is not on the list of properties to be acquired by the open space fund, and there have been no requests by the County, land trusts or other organizations to acquire it through purchase or condemnation. The North Kohala CDP did not suggest purchasing this parcel as it did for Kukuipahu-Haena, Mahukona, Pdo'o and Ka'iholena. Furthermore,public purchase of the land does not come without impacts—witness the environmental problems L associated with illegal camping, resource use and dumping at places such as P5o'o and other areas purchased by the County with the PONC. Any entity that wishes to purchase the land would be under the obligation to examine those impacts—How will you keep homeless from occupying the property?How will you stop illegal campfires? flow will you stop stone harvesters from taking rocks from a non-guarded property? How will you prevent off-road vehicles from destroying archaeological sites and worsening sedimentation? Moreover, a beneficial and highly cost-effective result of the proposed 6-lot subdivision will be to enable P public use of the entire area makai of the Ala Loa—the main part of the property that appears to F-11 have value for public use and access—with no public expenditure whatsoever. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 969-7090. Sincerely, 17 H Ron Terry, Principal F 'Geometrician Associates Cc: Michael Yee, Director, Hawaii County Planning Department Steven Lim, Partner, Carlsmith Ball LLP H U U, i � f-- LJ_ Lj L ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT C-: i 1 Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision L a APPENDIX 2 Biological Report El Lill, t . i [This page intentionally left blank] !.J Li U E r-� i � I_ (71 Terrestrial Flora and Fauna Survey LJ Kohala Shoreline LLC Property TMK: (3rd) 5-9-001:008 Kahuali`ili`i, North Kohala District, Hawaii.Island, State of Hawaii LJ By Ron Terry,Ph.D. Geometrician Associates,LLC Prepared for Kohala Shoreline,LLC January 2019 U! Kohala Shoreline proposes to develop a 6-lot subdivision on Akoni Pule Highway(State Route 270) on a 37.88-acre parcel located approximately three miles north of Kawaihae Eli, Harbor. The lots would be approximately five acres. n Field surveys of terrestrial biological resources were conducted by Ron Terry,Ph.D., at U various times in February 2010, March 2015, and December 2018,the combined results of which are presented below. DVegetation and Flora In February 2010, after a long dry period,the property was systematically walked in D' zigzagging transects perpendicular to the shoreline, spaced approximately 50 meters apart, with special attention to gulches,ridges, and outcrops. In addition,the entire Fi shoreline area was walked. On follow-up visits,which were conducted to observe the property after periods of rainfall, surveys took place on the shoreline,the trails,the gulches, and selected other areas. f1 As is typical of the region,the property was thickly covered with alien vegetation. Virtually the entire site is dominated by a low forest of scattered kiawe (Prosopis pallida) with an understory of buffel grass (Cenchrus ciliaris),with relatively little cover by other L plants. In gulches,runoff that creates soil moisture and collects seeds creates an environment where the flora is expanded by more species of weeds. A total of 30 plant species were identified. Only four of them,the common roadside herb `uhaloa(Waltheria indica),the common but cherished yellow-flowered ilima(Sida ( ? fallax),the common shoreline succulent `akulikuh(Sesuvium portulacastrum)and the strand vine pa`u O Hi`iaka(Jacquemontia ovalifolia), are indigenous to the Hawaiian Islands. The other 26 species are non-native. All plant species observed during the survey are listed in Table 1 below.No threatened or endangered plant species (USFWS 2019) are present or would be expected on the property. Furthermore,no plant critical habitat is Table I Plant Species on Project Site Scientific Name Famfly Common Name Life Form Status* Abutilon incanum Malvaceae Hoary abutilon Herb A Atriplex semibaccata Chenopodiaceae Australian saltbush Herb A Boerhavia coccinea Nyctaginaceae Boerhavia Herb A Cenchrus ciliaris Poaceae Buffel grass Grass A Cenchrus setaceus Poaceae Fountain grass Grass A Chamaesyce hirta Euphorbiaceae Garden spurge Shrub A �, Chenopodium murale Chenopodiaceae Goosefoot Herb A Cleome gynandra Capparaceae Spider flower Herb A Commelina benghalensis Commelinaceae Hairy honohono Herb A Cucumis dipsaceus Cucurbitaceae _ Hedgehog gourd Vine A Desmodium sp. Fabaceae Desmodium Vine A grostis amabilis Poaceae Lovegrass Grass A DEra Festuca bromoides Poaceae Brome fescue Grass A Ficus microcarpa Moraceae Chinese banyan Tree A Jacquemontia ovalifolia Convolvulaceae Pa'd 0 Hi'iaka Vine I P Lantana camara Verbenaceae Lantana Shrub A Leonotis nepetifolia Lamiaceae Lion's ear Herb A Leucaena leucocephala Fabaceae Haole koa Tree A Merremia aegyptia Convolvulaceae Hairy merremia Vine A Portulaca oleracea Portulacaceae Pigweed Herb A Portulaca pilosa Portulacaceae Portulaca Herb A Prosopis pallida Fabaceae Kiawe Tree A Ricinus communis Euphorbiaceae Castor bean Shrub A Sesuvium portulacastrum Aizoaceae 'Akulikuli Herb I Sida./allax Malvaceae 'Ilima Shrub I Sida rhombifolia Malvaceae Broom weed Herb A Spergula arvensis Caryophyllaceae Com spurry Herb A U Verbesifia encelioides Asteraceae Golden crown beard Herb A Herb Aine Tribulus terrestris Zygophyllaceae Puncture vine I I I n Waltheria indica Sterculiaceae 'Uhaloa I Herb I I U A=alien;I=indigenous; botanical names follow Wagner,Herbst and Sohmer 1990. present on the property or within four miles of the property (https:Hecos.fvvs.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html). The closest plant critical habitat is at above 2,000 feet in elevation in the Kohala Mountains. U Fauna No mammals were seen on the site,but studies of nearby areas indicate that the mammalian fauna of this part of Kohala is composed of mainly introduced species, including possibly small Indian mongooses (Herpestes a. auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis cattus)roof rats(Rattus r. rattus),Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus), European house mice U (Mus domesticus) and possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis). None are of conservation concern and all are deleterious to native flora and fauna. The only native Hawaiian land mammal,the Hawaiian hoary bat(Lasiurus cinereus semotus),may also be present in the area, as it is present in many areas on the island of Hawai'i. Observation took place in daylight, and therefore the lack of bat observations does not signify an actual absence of bats. Although the sparse kiawe-buffel grass vegetation of the site would not be expected to represent essential habitat for this LJ endangered species,they have been observed in kiawe scrub vegetation in other parts of Kona. Almost all birds seen on the site were wide-ranging aliens such as common mynas (Acridotheres tristis),yellow-billed cardinals (Paroaria capitata), saffron finches (Sicalis flaveola), gray francolins (Francolinus pondicerianus) and zebra doves (Geopelia striata). Other than the common shorebird 'ulili or wandering tattler(Heteroseelus incanus),which was observed right on the shoreline rocks,no birds indigenous to Hawaii were identified during the survey. No critical habitat(https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html) for terrestrial fauna is present in the area,but some endangered species may overfly this and all other areas of the Island of Hawaii. The Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis),the Hawaiian sub-species of Newell's shearwater(Puffinus newelli), and the band-rumped storm-petrel (Oceanodroma castro)have been recorded over-flying various areas on the Island of Hawaii between late April and the middle of December F, each year. The Hawaiian petrel and band-rumped storm-petrel are listed as endangered, and Newell's shearwater as threatened,under both federal and State of Hawaii endangered species statutes. These seabirds hunt over the ocean during the day and fly to higher elevations at night to roost and nest. The Hawaiian petrel and the band-rumped Ell storm petrel are known to nest at elevations well above 5,000 feet on the Big Island, nowhere near the property. But during it breeding season from April through November, the Newell's shearwater burrows under ferns on forested mountain slopes. These burrows are used year after year and usually by the same pair of birds. Although capable of L climbing shrubs and trees before taking flight, it needs an open downhill flight path through which it can become airborne. Once abundant on all the main Hawaiian Islands, U most Newell's shearwaters are today found in the steep terrain between 500 to 2,300 feet on Kaua'i(https://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/fauna/newellsshearwater.html). The primary cause of mortality for all three species in Hawaii is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the nesting colonies. Collision with man-made structures F-1 is another significant cause. Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their LJ way to sea in the summer and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Disoriented seabirds may collide with manmade structures and, if not killed outright, become easy targets of predatory mammals. These listed seabirds would not directly utilize the property but could occasionally overfly it. The only native Hawaiian land mammal,the Hawaiian hoary bat(Lasiurus cinereus semotus), may also occur in the area, as it has been observed in almost all parts of the island of Hawaii. Although the sparse kiawe-buffet grass vegetation of the site does not represent essential habitat for this endangered species,bats have been observed in kiawe Fill scrub vegetation in other parts of West Hawaii, and are undoubtedly present at least occasionally. r__ Impacts and Mitigation Measures In order to frame impacts to terrestrial flora and fauna, it is relevant that the property has been historically used for ranching,has been intensely affected by wildfire and is dominated by introduced plant species. The project will include gradual planting of native plants around homes near the shoreline with the intent to restore native species to enhance the biological environment and human enjoyment of the area. The plants envisioned—including pohuehue (Ipomoea pes-caprae),p5'-d-O-Hi'iaka(Jacquemontia ovalifolia), 'ilima.(Sidafallax), 6helo kai(Lycium sandwicense), akulikuh (Sesuvium portulacastrum),hinahina(Heliotropium anomalum),kauna'oa(Cuscuta sandwichiana)) —were selected because they were observed to be thriving on the site and/or in nearby areas without benefit of irrigation. Although low-lying and often grayish green and inconspicuous,with small flowers and fruit,they represent the natural vegetation and have rich cultural associations as well. These plants can be slowly added with gradual effort. Considering the existing environment and planned improvements to the flora,the development will produce almost no impacts to any species of flora and fauna other than the alien species already present. However, several mitigation measures that protect wide-ranging endangered animal species are recommended. To minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, it is recommended that initial infrastructure contract conditions and homeowner construction CC&Rs prohibit removal or trimming of woody plants taller than IS feet from June 1 to September 15 each year. This period is the most vulnerable time in the bat birthing and pup rearing season, and refraining from vegetation removal or trimming is recognized as appropriate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in recent Endangered Species Act consultations (e.g., see Hawaii State DHHL 2009). U Outdoor lighting at homes can attract threatened or endangered seabirds—the Hawaiian petrel the Hawaiian sub-species of Newell's shearwater, and the band-rumped storm- petrel— which may become disoriented by the lighting,resulting in downed birds. To L avoid the potential downing of these seabirds by interaction with outdoor lighting, no P construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting should be permitted after U dark between the months of April and October. All permanent lighting should be shielded in conformance with Hawaii County Outdoor Lighting Ordinance(Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights so as to lower the U ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. REFERENCES LU Gagne, W., and L. Cuddihy. 1990. "Vegetation,"pp. 45-114 in W.L. Wagner,D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohnier, eds.,Manual of the Flowering Plants ofHawaii. 2 iJ vols. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. U Banka, W. E. 1980. "Population Histories—Species Accounts Seabirds:Newell's Shearwater('A'o)." Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa,Department of Botany, Technical Report#5A. Day, R. H.,B. Cooper, and T. C. Telfer. 2003.Decline of Townsend's (Newell's Shearwaters (Puffinus auricularis newelli) on Kauai, Hawaii. The Auk 120: 669- 679. University of Hawaii at Hilo,Dept. of Geography. 1998.Atlas ofHawaii. 3rd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. [7 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service(USFWS). 2019. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System (TESS). Washington: GPO. https:Hecos.fws.gov/ecp/species- reports Wolfe, E.W., and J. Morris. 1996. Geologic Map of the Island ofHawai'i. USGS Misc Investigations Series Map i-2524-A. Washington,D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey. Li! Li F-1 [This page intentionally left blank] i7 l_1 Ell U �i L_ ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT i Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision P APPENDIX 3 E, Cultural Impact Assessment I r L F [This page intentionally left blank] r-� �.J F1 I L]a U i 'F.. Cultural Impact Assessment for the Proposed Development of L TMK-(0 (3) 5-9-01-0008 l., Kahuali it i Ahupua`a Forth Kohala District 1 Island. ®f Hawaii -' Prepared By: Robert B.Rechtman,PhD. It_ Prepared For: a Kohala Shoreline,LLC [ C/O Greg Mooers GRM Enterprises,LLC r P.O.Box 1101 L Kamuela,HI 96743 December 2018 LAS. r , Archaeology•History^Ethnog aphy•Archit—ral History 7777{808) 969.6.66 - Fax: (808) 443-oa65 If ASM Project Number 22500.00 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Proposed p p Development of TMK: (3) 5-9-01 :008 Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a North Kohala District Island of Hawaii AS Table of Contents CHAPTERS Page 1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................I 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION and PROPOSED development activities........5 3. CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT......................................................................9 A Generalized Model of Hawaiian Prehistory.................................................................... 9 HistoryAfter Contact........................................................................................................ 10 A Generalized Settlement Model for Kohala *Waho......................................................... 14 4. DISCUSSION OF PRIOR CULTURAL STUDIES.................................................25 5. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION..........................................................................27 Additional Consultation....................................................................................................28 6. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS.....................................................................................................................30 REFERENCES CITED. .35 FIGURES Page 1. Project area location map............................................................................................................2 2. Project area location.................................................................................................................... 3 3. Archaeological sites recorded within the current project area....................................................4 4. Keawewai Gulch drainage........................................................................................................... 5 5. Typical vegetation cover across the study parcel. ...................................................................... 6 6. Typical rocky shoreline along the study parcel. ......................................................................... 6 7. Typical rocky beach area. ........................................................................................................... 7 8. Waiakailio Bay............................................................................................................................ 7 9. Proposed Kohala Shoreline LLC development plan................................................................... 8 10. 1859 map of Kahudli'ili'i prepared by S. C. Wiltse showing the current project area........... 18 k 11.Hawaii Registered Map No. 2231 (prepared by A. B. Lobenstein in 1903) showing thecurrent project area............................................................................................................ 19 12. 1913 U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area........................ . ...... 22* 13. Portion of the 1931 Land Court Application map 1043 showing the current project area..... 23 14. 1956 U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area.................................24 15. Portion of Land Court Application 1043 Map 1 (dated 193 1)................................................ 33 16.Portion of 1935 Tax Map showing coastal"Hawaiian trail,"current project area shaded...332 17. 1994 map showing the establishment of a coastal public access along the shoreline. ........... 34 L L L CIA for TWM:(3)5-9-01:008,KahuMNIN,North Kohala,Hawaii I [This page intentionally left blank] n 1. Introduction 1. INTRODUCTION At the request of Kohala Shoreline, LLC, ASM Affiliates, Inc. has prepared this Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA)associated with the proposed subdivision and development of TMK:(3)5-9-01:008(Figure 1).The project area is within the State Urban District,on land zoned by the County of Hawai'i as RS-15(single-family residential with minimum lots of 15,000 square feet)in the ahupuaa of Kahu5li'ili'i,North Kohala District,Hawaii Island (Figure 2).Early archaeological work on the subject property included studies by Soehren(1964)and Bonk(1968). Soehren(1964)recorded two small rock cairns,a rock platform,and two open-ended enclosures with associated marine-shell and coral within the ahupuaa of Kahud 1 and 2. Bonk (1968)recorded 24 stone features within Kahud I.The concentration of Bonk's features that were recorded on the northern side of the current project area was later designated SW 4156 during the 1972 Statewide Inventory as the Waiakailio Bay Complex. These studies were of a regional nature and included archaeological survey of large tracts of land of which the study area was only a small part. Starting in 1983 Paul H.Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc(PIM)began a series of archaeological studies that focused on the current project area and adjoining land to the south(Allen 1985a, 1985b;Corbin 2000,2003,2004;Graves and Franklin 1998;Kubo and Rosendahl 2003;O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999;PERI 2000,2005;Rosendahl 1994). The resultant reports include reconnaissance surveys, an inventory survey, mitigation (preservation and data recovery)plans,and burial treatment plans.More recent work conducted by Rechtman Consulting,LLC and ASM Affiliates, Inc. as follow-up to those studies includes an archaeological data recovery project (Loubser and Rechtman 2007) in coastal Kahudnui, preservation planning (Rechtman 2014) for coastal sites in Waika, and L J Kahuanui,and an archaeological inventory survey update for the current study area(Rechtman and Clark 2010). This latter study contains a map that shows the locations of the archaeological sites recorded within the current n project area (Figure 3), and contains recommendations for the preparation of additional data recovery, U11 preservation,and burial treatment plans. Four additional studies are relevant for the current investigation.Maria Ka'imipono Orr completed a cultural impact assessment for a mauka portion of Kahudli'ili'i Ahupua'a associated with a communication tower facility El" (Off 2003). Her study contains detailed historical information for both of the Kahud ahupuaa. Kepd Maly prepared a detailed culture-historical background for Kaiholena Ahupua'a(Maly 2000)that included information relative to the general region known as Kohala waho or Outer Kohala,of which the current project area is a part. And, the current author prepared two cultural impact assessments, one for the land immediately adjacent to the E", current project area (Rechtman 2006), and another for a coastal parcel in nearby Pdo'o Ahupua'a (Rechtman 2004).Oral interviews conducted during the former study contain information applicable to the current study area, and information presented during a contested case hearing associated with the latter study is also reviewed in the current study. The information contained in these earlier studies, combined with additional research specific to Kahudli'ili'i, Ahupua'a, and additional consultation with members of both the North and South Kohala communities form the basis for the interpretations and evaluation presented in the current study. An earlier version of the current report was prepared for an earlier iteration of the current proposed development,which was for a nine-lot subdivision. Information gathered during the earlier study helped inform the decision to reduce the proposed subdivision density to six lots and move all potential development activity to the mauka side of the ala loa,for which additional consultation was conducted. This report was prepared in support of an environmental assessment in compliance with HRS Chapter 343, and in accordance with the Office of Environmental Quality Control(OEQC) Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impact,adopted by the Environmental Council,State of Hawaii,on November 19, 1997. Below is a description of the general project area and the proposed development activities. This is followed by a detailed background section providing setting and context (cultural,historical, and regional)to facilitate a more complete understanding of the potential significance of the cultural landscape and the historic and cultural properties within that landscape.Next,the consultation process is described,which is followed by a discussion of potential cultural impacts and the appropriate actions and strategies that mitigate any potential impacts. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 1. Introduction 200300mE, 2009nnn,E. 201500rnE, 202100m,E. 202900mE, V,,/GS,84 cone EQ 2G4100-E. a-- —" ''w J k rJ �V p f Pffii ylA i4° 41 'ti 6 �' �g r r 71 N ar +^ �uu�� r „g 7 't Q s. y, w� A,d r � E o E " y p n 1 "'T ^V, Q ,--'C� D � a.. , wwakriat 77, .a r, 1p ��" � �«'"" l C`""�q*''' a,�. '� �'" -� � f��' f /iia X�✓ � , i I1 dww � � k w n FRO.ILGT A121,A, � V AI f/i 1i9 �i/ r KK N t ( k ry ��uw �Ilivfyii � { r v1 � �1r / i,lattd offlati>,"ai°i t � w 20C E, 200900m E, 201560mE, 2021oomE, 202700mE" 20E300mE, 204000mE. TN I121'd a .5 1 MIILE. 503 101 a _.__, 101 tET_ a tail METERS 14ap created with TJPOID @2002 N atiorsal Geograrelk(i�,ww ruatvc-z algeographic.camltopo) Figure 1.Project area location map. 2 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 1. Introduction 1 �u v 2 'U C�"b '.' x r�.+ dot �`^�"} .:r ✓' �N -y l � I t rbv 4 r %! 1 1 f I L " 7. l L l S I` t i i � 1 it \ y, 1w dr•' �� Q y 7 \ \ 0 s \,' 1 < o J \ L ;1 / K 1110}�parce 1 1 i � i Figure 2. Project area location. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 3 1. Introduction 0 40 80 Seasonal drainage i Scale in Meters �� - - - Existing dirt roads �\ Archaeological features r r'uc r, Burial features in red r ffilldozcd area f A 411°`. 16135� r� n is n 61-c: ' �. - ! a 15261-A 13 J4oI$ 4012 , 16167 '� 6 �' tl �i 40111 „1,, 637 f 16162 3; 6136 1i 6134 6. an 1 ra 16132' `, 1.. f3 14;1 h 4005 A 400 Terr. e not nlentloned - - j� _ 2q i I t in site description 4002 004 < r \ 49'04 i a }etre ,V lydA 2494 / �= t' 16131 6149 16148 Pac�fic Ocean I'f,146 i 16145 ----------- ---- r1p64 A ''✓, 1041 Mari Marine shell scatter and aligmnent ' 1(;150 not mentioned in site description , °�f 161 16 11447 �1�6�43 161 4 ](,151 F3 ca� 16151, IFI$2 4 Mar ine shell seat not. mentioned in site description Figure 3.Archaeological sites recorded within the current project area. 4 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES The project area occupies 37.8 acres along the North Kohala coast,bounded by the ocean to the west and Akoni- Pule Highway(Hwy 270)to the east(see Figure 2).To the north the project area is bounded by undeveloped state land, and to the south by a partially developed privately-owned subdivision(see Figure 2). Elevation within the project area ranges from sea level to about 160 feet above sea level and the surface geology consists of basaltic lava flows from Kohala volcano dating from at least 120,000 years ago(Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil within the study area is classified as Kawaihae very rocky very fine sandy loam. The sloping terrain is dissected in a few locations by steeply incised drainage channels(Figure 4)and the vegetation is almost exclusively low grasses and kiawe(Figure 5).The typical shoreline in this area is rocky(Figure 6)with a few small coral,rock,and sand beach areas (Figure 7). Waiakailio Bay (Figure 8), at the northern end of the property, is the least rocky and most sheltered area along this portion of the coast,and it offers the easiest ocean access. The proposed development plan(Figure 9)includes the establishment of a six-lot subdivision. The property is currently zoned for single-family residential with minimum lots of 15,000 square feet (RS-15), which could allow for the development of over 100 units. Upon reviewing the project site and development options, the property owner determined that a less dense development would be more appropriate,and is proposing a change of zone to Residential Agricultural 3-acres (RA-3a), which would decrease potential density and lessen impacts to archaeological resources. Road access would be from two locations along Akoni-Pule Highway. The project would be provided with water, electrical, and telephone service from existing lines located within a utility easement above Akoni-Pule Highway.The house sites would be located a minimum of 150 feet below the highway and covenants,conditions and restrictions(CC&Rs)would limit homes to a single story and require color schemes that minimize visual impacts. Landscaping would be installed along the subdivision's two internal roadways and also on the residential lots,subject to CC&Rs.The project includes public shoreline access and associated parking and will preserve a coastal buffer that would extend from the current Jeep roadlala loa (SIHP Site 29271-A)to the shoreline. 0Q, 771 V Figure 4.Keawewai Gulch drainage. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ifi'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 5 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities r// r �/ /rr / /, ��„/ / I„'l��r///I,/qI 6� //! f,r�•(1/J//'/1,��f/o� 4�3-; - >/% ,,,✓J i r li/�,r/I/ rr ,/i r /i/I/�/��//l ra�Jf�//�� �/l�r� ��%�r��/� /�/,.��i//i1/�. � r„�, o r��- � /� �m, J d � r u m a 4. �ir1�y rl F �Y N JF rY 1�'�b ro� >✓Y� rt r 'r Y r; Figure 5.Typical vegetation cover across the study parcel. II d0 f r r r i f ,J✓ ))9J t �rl rW r �1' � d ka/�ffy� � r� ro�✓r J✓ fN � ` a�!� r r !F'�Y� fav/r '^ +^�'' r � r Figure 6.Typical rocky shoreline along the study parcel. 6 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities 0 a i u - n a L. x a Figure 7.Typical rocky beach area. /� % � ��t Figure 8.Waiakailio Bay. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 7 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development!Activities z � sW � m i 1Yll1 JiY Li r. rl l 1 , x i It, � .fSI 'L Vint A a r cd r r cd w 8 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 3. Culture-Historical Context 3. CULTURE-HISTORICAL CONTEXT A GENERALIZED MODEL OF HAWAIIAN PREHISTORY The generalized cultural sequence that follows is based on Kirch's(1985)model,and amended to include recent 71 revisions offered by Kirch (2011). The conventional wisdom has been that first inhabitants of Hawaii Island I probably arrived by at least A.D.300,and focused habitation and subsistence activity on the windward side of the island(Burtchard 1995;Kirch 1985;Hommon 1986).However,there is no archaeological evidence for occupation of Hawaii Island(or perhaps anywhere in Hawaii)during this initial settlement,or colonization stage of island occupation(A.D.300 to 600).More recently,Kirch(2011)has convincingly argued that Polynesians may not have arrived to the Hawaiian Islands until at least A.D. 1000,but expanded rapidly thereafter.The implications of this on the currently accepted chronology would alter the timing of the Settlement, Developmental, and Expansion Periods,possibly shifting the Settlement Period to A.D. 1000 to 1100,the Developmental Period to A.D. 1100 to 1350,and the Expansion Period to A.D. 1350 to 1650. The initial settlement in Hawaii is believed to have occurred from the southern Marquesas Islands.This was a period of great exploitation and environmental modification, when early Hawaiian farmers developed new subsistence strategies by adapting their familiar patterns and traditional tools to their new environment (Kirch 1985;Pogue 1978).Their ancient and ingrained philosophy of life tied them to their environment and kept order. Order was further assured by the conical clan principle of genealogical seniority (Kirch 1984). According to Fornander(1969), the Hawaiians brought from their homeland certain universal Polynesian customs: the major gods Kane, Ku, and Lono; the kapu system of law and order; cities of refuge; the 'aumakua concept; various epiphenomenal beliefs;and the concept of mance. The Development Period brought about a uniquely Hawaiian culture. The portable artifacts found in archaeological sites of this period reflect not only an evolution of the traditional tools,but some distinctly Hawaiian inventions. The adze (koi) evolved from the typical Polynesian variations of plano-convex, trapezoidal, and reverse-triangular cross-section to a very standard Hawaiian rectangular quadrangular tanged adze.A few areas in Hawai'i produced quality basalt for adze production.Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii was a well-known adze quarry. The two-piece fishhook and the octopus-lure breadloaf sinker are Hawaiian inventions of this period, as are Vu maika stones and lei Who palaoa. The later was a status item worn by those of high rank, indicating a trend toward greater status differentiation(Kirch 1985). The Expansion Period is characterized by the greatest social stratification,major socioeconomic changes,and intensive land modification.Most of the ecologically favorable zones of the windward and coastal regions of all major islands were settled and the more marginal leeward areas were being developed.Early dates from leeward Kohala(Kapa'anui)were reported by Dunn and Rosendahl(1989);these sites are believed to have been temporary campsites(Wulzen et al.1995).The greatest population growth occurred during the Expansion Period.Subsistence patterns intensified as crop fanning evolved into large irrigated field systems and expanded into the marginal dryland areas.The loko or fishpond aquaculture flourished during this period(Bellwood 1978;Kirch 1985). It was during the Expansion Period that a second major migration settled in Hawaii,this time from Tahiti in the Society Islands.According to Kamakau(1976)the kahuna Pa'ao settled in the islands during the 13'century. Pa'ao was the keeper of the god Ku'ka'ilimoku, who had fought bitterly with his older brother,the high priest Lonopele. After much tragedy on both sides, Pa'ao escaped Lonopele's wrath by fleeing in a canoe. Kamakau (1991:100-102)told the following story in 1866: Puna on Hawaii Island was the first land reached by Pa'ao,and here in Puna he built his first heiau for his god Aha'ula and named it Aha'uIa.[Waha'ula].It was a luakini.From Puna,Pa'ao went on to land in Kohala, at Pu'uepa.He built a heiau there called Mo'okini, a luakini. It is thought that Pa'ao came to Hawaii in the time of the a1i'i La`au because Pili ruled as mo'i after La'au.You will see Pili there in the line of succession,the mo'o kil'auhau,of Hanala'anui.It was said that Hawaii Island was without a chief, and so a chief was brought from Kahiki; this is according to chiefly genealogies.Hawaii Island had been without a chief for a long time,and the chiefs of Hawaii were a1i'i maka'dinana or just commoners. There were seventeen generations during which Hawaii Island was without chiefs--some eight hundred years. CIA for TNM:(3)5-9-01.008,Kahudli'ili'L North Kohala,Hawaii 9 3. Culture-Historical Background There are several versions of this story that are discussed by Beckwith(1976), including the version where Mo'okini and Kaluawilinau,two kahuna of Moikeha,decide to stay on at Kohala.The bones of the kahuna Pa'ao are said to be deposited in a burial cave in Kohala in Pu'uwepa[possibly Pu'uepa?](Kamakau 1964:41). The concept of the ahupuaa was established during the A.D. 1400s(Kirch 1985),adding another component to a then well-stratified society. This land unit became the equivalent of a local community,with its own social, economic,and political significance.Ahupuaa were ruled by ali'i 'ai ahupuaa or lesser chiefs;who,for the most part,had complete autonomy over this generally economically self-supporting piece of land,which was managed by a konohiki.Ahupuaa were usually wedge or pie-shaped,incorporating all of the eco-zones from the mountains to the sea and for several hundred yards beyond the shore,assuring a diverse subsistence resource base(Hommon 1986). The ali'i and the maka'jinana(commoners)were not confined to the boundaries of the ahupuaa;when there was a perceived need,they also shared with their neighbor ahupuaa ohana(Hono-ko-hau 1974).The ahupuaa was further divided into smaller sections such as the 'ili, mo`o paukuaina, kihapai, koele, hakuone, and kuakua(Hommon 1986,Pogue 1978).The chiefs of these land units gave their allegiance to a territorial chief or mo`i(king).Heiau building flourished during this period as religion became more complex and embedded in a sociopolitical climate of territorial competition. Monumental architecture, such as heiau, "played a key role as visual markers of chiefly dominance"(Kirch 1990:206). The Proto-Historic Period (A.D. 1650-1795) is marked by both intensification and stress. Wars occurred between intra-island and inter-island polities.Sometime between A.D. 1736 and 1758,Kamehameha I was born in the ahupuaa of Kokoiki,North Kohala near the Mo'okini Heiau[there is some controversy about his birth year, see Kamakau 1992:66-68]. The birth event is said to have occurred on a stormy night of rain, thunder, and lightning,signified the night before by a very bright,ominous star,thought by some to be Halley's comet[this is also controversial](Kamakau 1992).Kamehameha's ancestral homeland was in Halawa,North Kohala(Williams 1919). This period was one of continual conquest by the reigning alVi.Ke'eaumoku,son of Keawepoepoe,set up a fort at Pololu and Honokane; he was attacked there by Kalaniopu'u, so he moved to Maui. About A.D. 1759 Kalani'opu'u conquered East Maui,defeating his wife's brother,the Maui king Kamehamehanui,by using Hana's prominent Pu'u Kau'iki as his fortress. He appointed one of his Hawaii chiefs,Puna, as governor of Hana and Kipahulu. Kahekili became king of Maui in A.D. 1766 when Kameharnehanui died following an illness. Ke'eaumoku took his widow,Namahana, a cousin of Kamehameha 1,as his wife. Their daughter,Ka'ahumanu, the future favorite wife of Kamehameha 1,was born in a cave at the base of Pu'u Kau'iki,Hana,Maui in A.D. 1768 (Kamakau 1992). In A.D. 1775 Kalani'opu'u and his Hana forces raided and destroyed the neighboring Kaupo district,then launched several more raids on Molokai,Lanai,Kaho'olawe, and parts of West Maui.It was at the battle of Kalaeoka'ilio that Kamehameha, a favorite of Kalaniopu'u, was first recognized as a great warrior and given the name of Pai'ea(hard-shelled crab)by the Maui chiefs and warriors(Kamakau 1992).During the battles between Kalaniopu'u and Kahekili(1777-1779),Ka'ahumanu and her parents left Maui to live on the island of HawAN(Kamakau 1992). HISTORY AFTER CONTACT U Captain James Cook landed in the Hawaiian Islands on January 18, 1778. Ten months later, on a return trip to Hawaiian waters,Kalaniopu'u,who was at war with Kahekili,visited Cook on board the Resolution off the East coast of Maui.The following January[1779],Cook and Kalaniopu'u,met again in Kealakekua Bay and exchanged gifts. In February, Cook set sail; however, a severe storm off the Kohala coast damaged a mast and they had to return to Kealakekua. Cook's return occurred at an inopportune time, and this misfortune cost him his life (Kuykendall and Day 1976). In 1779 King of the Cook expedition explored the North Kohala country and reported: As far as the eye could reach, seemed fruitful and well inhabited. [Three and four miles inland, plantations of taro and potatoes and wauke]neatly set out in rows.The walls that separate them are made of the loose burnt stone,which are got in clearing the ground; and being entirely concealed Ll by sugar-canes planted close on each side, make the most beautiful fences that can be conceived. [The exploring party stopped six or seven miles from the sea.] To the left a continuous range of villages, interspersed with groves of coconut trees spreading along the sea-shore; a thick wood 10 CIA for TXM:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii i U 3. Culture-Historical Context behind this;and to the right,an extent of ground laid out in regular and well-cultivated plantations as they passed,they did not observe a single foot of ground,that was capable of improvement, left implanted.(Handy and Handy 1972:528) Around A.D. 1780 Kalaniopu`u proclaimed that his son Kiwalao would be his successor, and he gave the guardianship of the war god Ku`ka`ilimoku to Kamehameha.Kamehameha and a few other chiefs were concerned about their land claims, which Kiwalao did not seem to honor, so after usurping Kiwalao's authority with a sacrificial ritual,Kamehameha retreated to his district of Kohala.While in Kohala,Kamehameha farmed the land, growing taro and sweet potatoes(Handy and Handy 1972).After Kalani`opu`u died in A.D. 1782 civil war broke r ; out: Kiwalao was killed. The wars between Maui and Hawaii continued until A.D. 1795 (Kuykendall and Day U 1976;Handy and Handy 1972). In 1790 two Western ships,the Eleanora and Fair American,were trading in Hawaiian waters.As retribution for the theft of a skiff and the murder of one of the sailors,the crew of the Eleanora massacred more than 100 natives at Olowalu [Maui]. The Eleanora then sailed to Hawaii Island,and one of its crew, John Young, went ashore,where he was detained by Kamehameha.The other vessel,the Fair American, was captured by the forces of Kamehameha off the Kekaha coast and its crew was killed except for one member,Isaac Davis.Kame`eiarnoku, who resided in Ka`upulehu at the time,played a lead role in this incident.He and his followers recovered several foreign arms from the Fair American,including a cannon that they called"Lopaka",all of which were turned over to Kamehameha(Kamakau 1992).Kamehameha made Young and Davis his advisors.He also kept the vessel as part of his fleet.With the aid of his new advisors,new ship,and foreign arms Kamehameha conquered Maui,and by 1796 he had conquered all the island kingdoms except Kauai.It wasn't until 1810,when Kaumuali`i of Kauai gave his allegiance to Kamehameha,that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler(Kuykendall and Day 1976). Demographic trends during this period indicate population reduction in some areas, due to war and disease, yet increases in others, with relatively little change in material culture. However, there was a continued trend _ toward craft and status specialization,intensification of agriculture,ali`i controlled aquaculture,upland residential sites,and the enhancement of traditional oral history.The Ku cult,luakini heiau,and the kapu system were at their peaks,although western influence was already altering the cultural fabric of the Islands(Kirch 1985;Kent 1983). Foreigners had introduced the concept of trade for profit,and by the time Kamehameha I had conquered Oahu, Maui and Molokai,in 1795,Hawaii saw the beginnings of a market system economy(Kent 1983).This marked U the end of an era of uniquely Hawaiian culture. Hawai`i's culture and economy continued to change drastically as capitalism and industry established a firm foothold. The sandalwood(Santalum ellipticum)trade,established by Euro-Americans in 1790 and turned into a viable commercial enterprise by 1805(Oliver 1961),was flourishing by 1810.This added to the breakdown of the traditional subsistence system, as farmers and fishermen were ordered to spend most of their time logging, ( resulting in food shortages and famine that led to a population decline.Kamehameha did manage to maintain some I control over the trade(Kuykendall and Day 1976;Kent 1983). Kamehameha I died on May 8, 1819 at Kamakahonu in Kailua-Kona,and once again the culture of Hawaii was to change radically.Following the death of a prominent chief,it was customary to remove all of the regular kapu that maintained social order and the separation of men and women and elite and commoner.Thus,following L Kamehameha's death a period of`ai noa(free eating)was observed along with the relaxation of other traditional kapu.It was for the new ruler and kahuna to re-establish kapu and restore social order,but at this point in history j traditional customs saw a change: The death of Kamehameha was the first step in the ending of the tabus;the second was the modifying of the mourning ceremonies;the third,the ending of the tabu of the chief;the fourth,the ending of -; carrying the tabu chiefs in the arms and feeding them; the fifth, the ruling chiefs decision to introduce free eating(`ainoa)after the death of Kamehameha;the sixth,the cooperation of his aunts, Ka-ahu-manu and Ka-heihei-malie;the seventh,the joint action of the chiefs in eating together at the suggestion of the ruling chief, so that free eating became an established fact and the credit of j establishing the custom went to the ruling chief.This custom was not so much of an innovation as might be supposed.In old days the period of mourning at the death of a ruling chief who had been greatly beloved was a time of license.The women were allowed to enter the heiau,to eat bananas, t coconuts, and pork,and to climb over the sacred places.You will find record of this in the history of Ka-ula-hea-nui-o-ka-moku,in that of Ku-ali`i,and in most of the histories of ancient rulers.Free r CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 11 I_ 3. Culture-Historical Background eating followed the death of the ruling chief; after the period of mourning was over the new ruler placed the land under a new tabu following old lines.(Kamakau 1992:222) Immediately upon the death of Kamehameha 1, Liholiho (his son and to be successor) was sent away to Kawaihae to keep him safe from the impurities of Kamakahonu brought about from the death of Kamehameha. After purification ceremonies Liholiho returned to Kamakahonu: Then Liholiho on this first night of his arrival ate some of the tabu dog meat free only to the chiefesses;he entered the lauhala house free only to them;whatever he desired he reached out for; everything was supplied,even those things generally to be found only in a tabu house.The people saw the men drinking rum with the women kahu and smoking tobacco,and thought it was to mark the ending of the tabu of a chief.The chiefs saw with satisfaction the ending of the chief's tabu and the freeing of the eating tabu.The kahu said to the chief,"Make eating free over the whole kingdom from Hawaii to Oahu and let it be extended to Kauai!" and Liholiho consented. Then pork to be eaten free was taken to the country districts and given to commoners,both men and women, and free eating was introduced all over the group.Messengers were sent to Maui,Molokai, Oahu and all the way to Kauai, Ka-unm-ali'i consented to the free eating and it was accepted on Kauai. (Kamakau 1992:225) When Liholiho, Kamehameha II, ate the kapu dog meat, entered the lauhala house and did whatever he desired it was still,during a time when he had not reinstituted the eating kapu but others appear to have thought otherwise.Liholiho's cousin,Kekuaokalani,caretaker of the war god Kii'kd'ilimoku,revolted,but by December of 1819 the revolution was quelled.With an indefinite period of free-eating and the lack of the reinstatement of other kapu extending from Hawaii to Kaua'i,and the arrival of the Christian missionaries shortly thereafter,the traditional religion had been officially replaced by Christianity within a year following the death of Kamehameha I. Kamehameha II sent edicts throughout the kingdom renouncing the ancient state religion, ordering the destruction of the heiau images, and ordering that the heiau structures be destroyed or abandoned and left to UU deteriorate.He did,however,allow the personal family religion,the'aumakua worship,to continue(Oliver 1961; Kamakau 1992). In October of 1819,seventeen Protestant missionaries set sail from Boston to Hawaii.They arrived in Kailua- Kona on March 30, 1820 to a society with a religious void to fill.Many of the ali'i, who were already exposed to western material culture,welcomed the opportunity to become educated in a western style and adopt their dress and religion.Soon they were rewarding their teachers with land and positions in the Hawaiian government.During this period,the sandalwood trade was wreaking havoc on the commoners,who were weakening with the heavy production, exposure, and famine just to fill the coffers of the ali'i who were no longer under any traditional r-, constraints(Oliver 1961;Kuykendall and Day 1976).On a stopover in the Kohala district Ellis wrote: UI J About eleven at night we reached Towaihae [Kawaihae], where we were kindly received by Mr. Young. . . . Before daylight on the 22nd, we were roused by vast multitudes of people passing through the district from Waimea with sandal-wood,which had been cut in the adjacent mountains for Karaimoku,by the people of Waimea,and which the people of Kohala,as far as the north point, U had been ordered to bring down to his storehouse on the beach,for the purpose of its being shipped to Oahu.There were between two and three thousand men,carrying each from one to six pieces of sandal-wood,according to their size and weight.It was generally tied on their backs by bands of ti leaves,passed over the shoulders and under the arms,and fastened across their breasts.(Kuykendall and Day 1976:42,43;Ellis 1963:397) The lack of control of the sandalwood trade was to soon lead to the first Hawaiian national debt as promissory notes and levies were initiated by American traders and enforced by American warships (Oliver 1961). The Hawaiian culture was well on its way towards Western assimilation as industry in Hawaii went from the sandalwood trade,to a short-lived whaling industry,to the more lucrative,but environmentally destructive sugar industry. The windward portions of North Kohala became a center of sugarcane production,although sugarcane cultivation in Kohala had its origins in prehistory. Pukui(1983)cites two proverbs that reference both Kohala and sugarcane. She provides an explanation and F) notes that Hawaiian proverbs have layers of meaning that are best left to the imagination of the reader: He pa`a k5 kea no Kohala, e kole ai ka waha ke 'ai A resistant white sugar cane of Kohala that injures the mouth when eaten. L 12 CIA for TNM:(3)5-9-01:008,KabuFdi'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 3. Culture-Historical Context Pukui explains this proverb as follows: A person that one does not tamper with. This was the retort of Pupukea,a Hawaii chief,when the Maui chief Makakaikalani made fun of his small stature. It was later used in praise of the warriors of Kohala,who were known for valor(1983:95). I 'ike 'ianooKohala ikapaekt5, aokapaek5iakale aikawaha. One can recognize Kohala by her rows of sugar cane which can make the mouth raw when chewed. Pukui interprets this proverb as follows: When one wanted to fight a Kohala warrior,he would have to be a very good warrior to succeed. Kohala men were vigorous,brave,and strong(1983:127). Sugarcane(Saccharum officinarum)was a Polynesian introduction and served a variety of uses. The k5 kea or white cane was the most common, usually planted near Hawaiian homes for medicinal purposes, and to counteract bad tastes (Handy and Handy 1972:185). Sugarcane was a snack, condiment, famine food; fed to U nursing babies,and helped to strengthen children's teeth by chewing on it(Handy and Handy 1972:187). It was used to thatch houses when pili grass (Heteropogon contortus) or lau kala (Pandanus odortissimus) were not abundant(Malo 1903).Sugarcane was also used in relation to taro and sweet potato.Handy and Handy(1972:186) explain: In wet-taro farming, cane was planted along the embankments separating the flooded terraces and flats. In dry-taro and sweet-potato fields on the sloping kula or in the lower forest zone,cane was planted as hedges along the lines of stone and rubbish thrown up between the fields.Thus it helped the planter to utilize to the maximum his soil and water,and acted as a windbreak against the gusty breezes which blow in most valley bottoms, along the coasts, and on the uplands where taro is grown. Sugarcane was grown on all islands, and when Cook arrived he wrote of seeing sugarcane plantations. The Chinese on L'ana'i are credited with producing sugar first, as early as 1802.However, it was not until 1835 that sugar became established commercially,replacing the waning sandalwood industry(Oliver 1961,Kuykendall and Day 1976). Kohala became a land in transition and eventually a major force in the sugar industry with the arrival of American missionary Elias Bond(KTF 1975). In her comprehensive study of North Kohala, Tomonari-Tuggle relates this transition: The arrival in 1841 of Elias Bond,of the Protestant American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions,to Kohala marked the beginning of a 22-year period of transition in the district's history. In those years a new religion, a new land tenure system, and a changing economy altered the lifestyles and world view of the indigenous population of the district. The Kohala community was in flux, attempting to find a firm footing in a changing world, in a much larger network of social, R, political,and economic interactions than had previously existed.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:1-23) LI When Elias Bond directed his efforts to initiating sugar as a major agricultural industry in Kohala, he could not have foreseen the incredible success of his modest venture.His primary concern was nto develop a means for the Hawaiian people of the district to compete successfully in the market L economy that had evolved in Hawaii.What resulted was a vigorous,stable,and competitive industry which survived over a century of changing economic situations.For the Hawaiian people,however, the impact was not what Bond anticipated.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:1-39) In 1860 Rev. Bond engaged Samuel N. Castle in founding the Kohala Sugar Company on lands owned by Bond and his neighbor Dr. James Wight. The first crop was harvested in January 1865 (KTF 1975). Kohala's transition was a reflection of what was happening elsewhere in Hawaii as the sugar industry grew. The industry brought in tens of thousands of laborers from Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa to work on the many plantations and mills that were being established on all major islands (Oliver 1961). This influx not only radically changed the culture,but also drastically altered agricultural lands and destroyed traditional architectural features in the process.The drier leeward portions of Kohala were not suited for cane cultivation and thus became vast pasturelands for grazing cattle. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 13 3. Culture-Historical Background A GENERALIZED SETTLEMENT MODEL FOR KOHALA WAHO The following summary of settlement patterns for the leeward coast of North Kohala follows earlier regional models (Rosendahl 1972; Griffin et al. 1971; Tomonari-Tuggle 1988) and takes into account observations and information contained in traveler,missionary,and Kingdom records(Maly 2000). Evidence for early occupation of Kohala has been collected from Kapa'anui. Dunn and Rosendahl (1989) recovered radiocarbon samples that potentially date to as early as A.D. 460 (Site 12444). This early date may be related to the establishment of small,short-term camps to exploit seasonal,coastal resources.Data recovered from Malmkona suggest initial occupation there by A.D. 1280(Burgett and Rosendahl 1993:36).The earliest date range for permanent settlement in Kohala(A.D. 1300)was obtained from Koai'e,a coastal settlement where subsistence primarily derived from marine resources. According to Tomonari-Tuggle (1988:13), these resources were probably supplemented by small-scale agriculture. The period from A.D. 1300-1500 was characterized by population growth and expanded efforts to increase upland agriculture.Rosendahl(1972)has proposed that settlement at this time was related to seasonal,recurrent occupation in which coastal sites were occupied in the summer to exploit marine resources,and upland sites were occupied during the winter months,with a focus on agriculture. An increasing reliance on agricultural products may have caused a shift in social networks as well,according to Hommon(1976).Hommon argues that kinship links between coastal settlements disintegrated as those links within the mauka-makai settlements expanded to accommodate exchange of agricultural products for marine resources.This shift is believed to have resulted in the establishment of the ahupua'a system.The implications of this model include a shift in residential patterns from seasonal,temporary occupation,to permanent dispersed occupation of both coastal and upland areas. This pattern continued to intensify from A.D. 1500 to Contact(A.D. 1778),and there is evidence that suggests that there were substantial changes to the political system as well. Within Kohala, the Great Wall complex at Koai'e is organized with platforms in the complex apart from contemporaneous features. Griffin et al. (1971) interpret this as symbolizing class stratification.By AD 1600,there is island-wide evidence to suggest that growing conflicts between independent chiefdoms were resolved through warfare, culminating in a unified political structure at the district level. It has been suggested that this unification resulted in a partial abandonment of portions of leeward Hawaii,with people moving to more favorable agricultural areas(Barrera 1971; Schilt and Sinoto 1980). By the time of contact,numerous coastal villages and extensive dryland agricultural systems were in place in North Kohala.The ahupua'a system of social organization was also firmly established by this time,with defined land units extending from the mountains to the sea. The ahupua'a were controlled by local chiefs, and were integrated at the district level. Districts were ruled by paramount chiefs through a system,of taxation and redistribution. Social stratification was defined by a class separation between the ruling ali'i(chiefs)at one end, and the maka'jinana (commoners) at the other. Kamehameha I eventually united the Island of Hawaii, and ultimately all of the Hawaiian Islands,and freely participated in the European-introduced market economy. The earliest detailed written descriptions of the region are contained in the Journal of William Ellis (1963), an English Missionary who traveled through the area in 1823.Two of his journal entries are of particular relevance: a visit to the villages of Owawarua[Awalua]Oust south of Kukuipahu)and Hihiu(Millmkona),and an account of the coast between Towaihae[Kawaihae]and Mdhukona related to him by one of his companions:Lorrin Thurston. About three p.m.we reached Owawarua, a considerable village on the north-west coast,inhabited mostly by fisherman.Here we tried to collect a congregation,but only three women and two small children remained in the place,the rest having gone to Waimea to fetch sandalwood for Karaiomoku. From Owawarua we passed on to Hihiu,where we had an opportunity to speak to a small party of natives. In these villages we saw numbers of canoes and many large fishing nets,which are generally made with a native kind of flax,very strong and durable. . .In taking fish out of the sea,they commonly make use of a net, of which they have many kinds, some very large, others mere hand-nets;they occasionally employ the hook and line,but never use the spear or dart which is a favourite weapon with the southern islanders. Quantities of fish were spread out in the sun to dry, in several places, and the inhabitants of the northern shores seem better supplied with this article than those of any other part of the island. . . . 14 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii L j 3. Culture-Historical Context Being considerably fatigued,and unable to find any fresh water in the village,we procured a canoe to take us to Towaihae, from which we were distant about 20 miles.Though we had numbered,in I i our journey today,600 houses,we had not seen a thing like four hundred people,almost the whole L population being employed in the mountains cutting sandalwood.It was about seven o'clock in the evening when we sailed from Hihiu,in a single canoe.(Ellis 1963:285-286) LJ On the 23d Mr. Thurston left Towaihae, and walked along the shore towards the north point [`Upolu]. About noon he reached the small village, called Kipi [North of Kahuali`ili`i], where he preached to the people; and as there was only one village between Kipi and the place where I had preached on Wednesday evening[Hihiu/Mahukona],he retraced his steps to Towaihae.He preached at another four villages on his return[perhaps at settlements within or adjacent to the current project area],where the congregations,though not numerous,were attentive. . .The coast was barren;the rocks volcanic; the men were all employed in fishing; and Mr. Thurston was informed that the inhabitants of the plantations,about seven miles in the interior,were far more numerous than on the U shore.In the evening he reached Towaihae.(Ellis 1963:288) Ellis (1963), whose colleague Thurston traveled through the project area in 1823, not only noted a barren coastline,but also limited cultivation around settlements.Early travelers' accounts indicate that managed stands of trees normally occurred near settlements;these included coconut, lauhala(Pandamus sp.), loulu(Prichardia sp.), milo (Thespesia p©pulnea), and kou (Cordia subcordata). Hawaiians in general cultivated a number of tropical root,tuber, and tree crops,the most important being taro (kalo, Colocasia esculanta) and sweet potato (`uala, Ipomoea batatas). Planting, tending, and harvesting crops was typically men's work, although women weeded and maintained dry land fields(Kirch 1997:2). r, Dry taro was grown in the lower forest zone farther up the slopes of Kohala Mountain(Handy and Handy 1972:531).According to Handy and Handy this forest used to extend further makai over what is now open pasture. 1.--� Wet taro was grown in small pockets wherever even intermittent streams flowed(ibid.).However, sweet potato was probably the main source of carbohydrates for people who lived in the dry kula lands(ibid. 532).According to Maly(1999),mounds were mulched with sugarcane refuse,known as Pu`u-`aina-ko;and this is recorded as a regional name for the fields that once occurred within the general vicinity of the project area. Taken together, orally transmitted accounts and documented eyewitness accounts seem to suggest that the project area was far more luxuriant than what is currently the case. CIn 1825 Thurston told Ellis(1963:408)that people living in the wooded and upslope part of the Kohala coast interior"were far more numerous than those of the sea-shore." It is conceivably the people from this area that Menzies(1920:56)observed in 1793 as carrying timber from the uplands to the coast.That people laboring in the uplands were the same as those fishing along the coast, however, is attested by Ellis's 1823 observation of "inhabitants of the northern shores...being employed in the mountains cutting sandalwood" (Ellis 1963:409). Apart from cultivating fields and using inland resources, Ellis (1963:408) observed that inhabitants of the settlements in the project area fished extensively in the nearby ocean.This is substantiated by Varigny's(1981:73) observation in the 1850s that within leeward Kohala"are rich in fishing grounds...the seas was covered with small native canoes, shaped from hollowed logs and balanced by a cross-beam, or outrigger, and nearly all equipped with triangular sails." In Hawaii it was the ocean that yielded the greatest variety and abundance of protein. ! Hawaiian fishermen used varied techniques and tools to obtain food from inshore reefs to deeper benthic waters, includingbone and shell fishhooks spears, traps, nets and weirs. Women gathered mollusks sea urchins and p p , g � , seaweed from rocky headlands and bays(Kirch 1997:3). t ' In addition to being accomplished extractors of food from the ocean,Polynesians brought domestic pigs,dogs, and fowl with them to Hawaii and raised a substantial number of these animals for food.Within the vicinity of the project area,much of the produce and pigs seem to have been raised in the uplands and brought down to the shore.Furthermore,it is in the uplands that commoners mostly labored,while aristocrats tended to live along the L- shoreline. The use of mauka/makai trails facilitated transhumance between the different ecological areas. Old Hawaiian tales also bear witness to this spatial link between coasfand interior and the social relationship between aristocrat and laborer. It is to some of these traditional stories that the discussion now turns, dealing specifically with those that mention natural features in the vicinity of the project area by name.Many of the place names are no longer used, but their meanings indicate particular uses or features of the named locations or their direct or metaphorical associations with historical personages(Maly 2000:53). i CIA.for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahusli`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 15 li 3. Culture-Historical Background According to Maly (2000:28), traditional Hawaiians see all things and people within their environment as being interrelated;those from the coastal lowlands were linked to those from the interior uplands.The ahupua`a �} as a land unit was the thread that bound these things and people together.An ahupua`a was typically under the ({ control of an appointed konohiki, or chief-landlord of lower rank. This person answered to an ali'i-ai-ahupua`a, —' or chief who controlled the ahupua`a resources. The ali`i-ai-ahupua`a in turn answered to an ali`i `ai moku, or chief who claimed the produce from the entire district that combines a number of ahupua`a. Produce from the (� ahupua a accordingly not only supported the laborers,or maka`dinana,but also supported the royals,or ali`i.The ( j ideology that accompanied the social relations of production between these two classes and its representation of the environment are aptly recalled in various traditional Hawaiian tales. Native Hawaiians succinctly compare the Kohala peninsula with a built structure.According to the Hawaiian language newspaper Ka Hoku o Hawai'i(1917)(as quoted by Maly 1999),two prominent volcanic cinder cones on Kohala Mountain are referred to as "the ridge pole"of the area, "which bear the winds,rain and sun of this Fi famous land on their back."Traditions reputedly dating back to the 1600s described the leeward coast of Kohala as"containing many houses"(Kamakau 1961:56)"with men to every point of the land."(Pukui 1983:1973).What we see here then is conceivably a portrayal of the Kohala landscape as one massive house containing many people. That this structure is animated by the strong winds can be seen in the poetic allusion of the paired cinder cones as being"two traveling hills...which follows behind one like a lover."In another account the"two traveling hills" I_ on Kohala Mountain act"like a sweetheart nestled fondly in the bosom of love . . ."(Maly 2000:38). In a third story these two traveling hills are said to"mystify men."(Maly 2000:40).Accounts such as these strongly suggest that certain landscape features were anthropomorphized;not only was the environment intricately linked to human affairs and actions,at times the environment behaved in a human fashion. According to Pukui et al.(1974)the name Kahua means"the jealous one."Interestingly,Kahua is also called } koai`e,a native hard wood(Acacia koaia)similar to koa that is associated in a traditional chant with a commoner IIJf who was in close pursuit of his aristocratic girlfriend(Colum 1937).All-in-all,indigenous tales seem to intricately link landscape features and legendary personages within the general project area. Closer scrutiny of such tales, some of which could have great antiquity, may throw light on former ideological conceptions, social divisions, and how these affected the general use of the environment and its resources. The term kahud is mentioned in a legend that supposedly dates back to the thirteenth-century joint reign of two Kohala paramount chiefs known as Hikapoloa and Kapa`au-iki-a-Kalana(Maly 1999).In this legend kahud is the name given to comparatively open and level locales where people gathered for competitive sports,not unlike I the flat pebble beaches at the mouths of Keanahalululu and Keawewai gulches. In the legend,Keanahalululu is the name of a male commoner who tended the sugarcane of a local female chief known as Keawe.Keanahalululu also refers to the roaring sound that wind makes when blowing through a cave or narrow gulch.In the legend it is Keanahalululu who accompanies royal visitors from a neighboring area to his female chief Keawe,very much like the virtually ever-present wind that greets travelers through the district of Kohala. To the south of the current project area is Keanahalululu Gulch,and Keawewai Gulch is within the project area.The term Ke-awe-wai in fact means narrow watercourse,or the water of the female chief Keawe(Maly 1999). The pairing of Keanahalululu and Keawewai Gulches on the natural landscape is perhaps echoed by the pairing of legendary personages with the same names in the following ways: male and female, commoner and j aristocrat,wind and water.These related sets of oppositions also seem to be expressed in another legend where a J commoner male named Hiku follows an aristocratic female known as Kawelu below the water of the ocean from his farming abode in the Kohala uplands. This brings to mind the mumuku wind that sweep down the slopes of } Kohala Mountain into the sea immediately below, which forces the surface of the water to boil and seemingly J open up in places.Moreover,the commoners Keanahalululu and Hiku were not allowed to consume certain foods reserved for the aristocrats Keawe and Kawelu. Though resentful of this prohibition the male commoners nonetheless came to the aid of their female rulers when they were in jeopardy. Perhaps this shows that the opposition between commoner and aristocrat is reminiscent of the opposition between persistent winds (i.e., constant labor) versus fluctuating rains (i.e., change of rulers and/or their power). Like the ultimate interdependence between wind and rain, traditional Hawaiians conceivably used this observable natural relationship as anapt metaphor for an idealized interdependence between socioeconomic classes; commoners supplied aristocrats with food but in the end relied on aristocratic mediation with the spirit world and maintenance of intra-and inter-regional affairs(e.g.,Kirch 1997:6-7). 16 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii U 3. Culture-Historical Context �J As early as the 1830s,missionaries in Kohala noting that"deaths are more numerous than births;[h]ence the population is decreasing" (Doyle 1953:72), began compiling census records by ahupua`a. In an 1835 census, Kahua(combined) is listed as having a resident population of 256 (Schmidt 1973:27), documenting a sizeable L1 population. Traditional and historical accounts indicate that the residents of the ahupua`a in Kohala waho lived both along the coast in fishing villages and in the uplands near the agricultural systems.It is interesting that within j Kahua there were 256 residents recorded in 1835,and that eleven years later in 1846 there was only one claimant for a kuleana in Kahuanui during the Mahele;the claim was not awarded having been contested by Kekuanao`a. Traditional land use patternssaw a rapid shift after the Mahele in 1848. By the mid-19th century, leeward settlement shifted to the windward side of North Kohala as the leeward, agriculturally marginal, areas were J abandoned in favor of more productive and wetter sugarcane lands.In addition,native populations were decimated by disease and a depressed birth rate.According to Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:37),the remnant leeward population nucleated into a few small coastal communities and dispersed upland settlements. Settlements were no longer i based on traditional subsistence patterns, largely because of the loss of access to the full range of necessary resources.At this point most communities were centered on sugar mills and became part of the plantation social hierarchy.Much of the coastal land in leeward North Kohala was used as cattle pasture.Walled complexes became the dominant residential structure for those remaining leeward settlements as families enclosed their holdings to protect them from feral cattle and to clearly define their kuleana boundaries. Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a is one of the three southernmost ahupua a of the North Kohala District(only Kahuanui Ahupua`a and Waika Ahupua`a,along the North Kohala/South Kohala boundary,are further south;see Figure 2). During the Mahele of 1848 all three of these ahupua`a were awarded to ali`i. Kahuali`ili`i was awarded to Lot Kapuaiwa(Kamehameha V)as LCAw. 7715:5,Kahuanui was awarded to Victoria Kamamalu(Lot's Sister and last Kahina-Nui of Hawaii)as LCAw.7713:4,and Waika was awarded to Gina Lahilahi(daughter of John Young) as LCAw. 8020-B:2. Pahinahina Ahupua`a, bordering Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a to the north, was retained as Government Land.There were no kuleana awarded within Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a during the Mahele of 1848. By 1857 Kahuali`ili`i had been leased by Lot Kapuaiwa to G. W.Macey,who also leased Waika Ahupua`a from Victoria Kamamalu in 1859(Graves and Frankilin 1998).An 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S. C. Wiltse(Figure 10)shows a"Road to Macy[sic]and Vida's Ranch"that extends from the coast within the current project area(labeled"Waiakailio Landing")inland towards Kahuanui and Waika ahupua`a,suggesting that Macey had leased the lands for ranching purposes,and that Waiakailio Bay was the landing for the ranch.Later Boundary Commission testimony(in 1873;see below)indicates'that the houses belonging to Macey and Vida were located near the KahuanuilWaika boundary close to the Government Road, well mauka of the current project area. L} Ownership of Kahuali`ili`i and Waika, which would eventually become part of Kahua Ranch, changed hands several times during the second half of the nineteenth century. In the 1890s these lands sold (along with other ! lands)to John Maguire,who managed Huehue Ranch in Kona.In about 1895 Mr.Maguire sold a half interest in the Kahua lands to James Frank Woods,who then assumed management of the property and later purchased the half interest that John Maguire still held(Henke 1929). In 1862, to certify the boundaries of the ahupua`a awarded during the Mahele, the Kingdom of Hawai'i established the Boundary Commission. The primary informants for the boundary descriptions were elder native residents. Their testimony provides a wealth of information concerning the locations of place names and landmarks. Some of the witnesses also inform about the functions of certain areas on the landscape(e.g.,resting places, residential areas, agricultural plots, fishing grounds, boundary markers). This information is very useful Lill, when interpreting archaeological features as elements of a cultural landscape.Many of the locations referenced in the boundary testimony are depicted on a map of the lands of Waika and Kahuali`ili`i prepared by A.B.Lobenstein in 1903,the year when the boundaries of those ahupua`a were officially set(Hawai`i Registered Map No.2231; Figure 11). The 1903 map also shows the route of the ala loa(coastal trail)between Kawaihae and Mahukona across the current project area. I , i , CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 17 i 3. Culture-Historical Background r t 'r �frrnr •+i .,4 fMrl:��rrrrr u 4An ^• �� • „ fir ��r,. �y� �,. �t '�ylr l/rr.- 1` 4/4fn A/"u. 'fllA.,�' /rr (rar,f �(rrr. drb a:7'. r• project area I Cx;dr19 } i Figure 10. 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S.C.Wiltse showing the current project area. 18 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii r-, 3. Culture-Historical Context U eF Detail of project area. (I i rel .� ♦ � � — � 4'k. L 10 T_- Y j s � i M1n� 3 � V t t t z 1 � $ S {it 7 1, _t i + a I° OF THE l.,ANCJG(}F Project areaI ti 4 , MOR;r1-/'€"Gh'.�U 11,4W9:.° __ �1,� S„eee,eM*lnpxe ' s.s l.' Figure 11.Hawaii Registered Map No.2231 (prepared by A.B.Lobenstein in 1903)showing the current project area. CIA for TMK.:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 19 3. Culture-Historical Background Hearings for establishing the boundaries of Kahuali`ili`i (also known as Kahua 1") began in November of 1873, roughly one year after Lot Kapuaiwa died; apparently the ahupua`a became part of his father's (M. R Kekuanao`a) estate. The boundaries were not officially set until December of 1903, by which time the land in question had been acquired by James Woods.The 1873 boundary testimony reads as follows: Kaili,kane, sworn,I was born in Kohala at the time of the great famine,now live in Kokio;know the boundaries of Kahualiilii.Kiha,my Father and Pohina,my Uncle,showed them to me.I do not know all the boundaries between Kahuanui and Kahualiilii.Bounded on the north side at shore by Fill, the land of Pahinahina,commencing at a cave called Lehua,the boundary runs makai to a point at the sea shore called Kananakauwa;thence it runs mauka to a pile of rocks at Lehua;thence mauka ( j to an ahu named Panipani; thence mauka to another pile of stones and thence to a place, called UKilohana where there is a pile of stones that Kahuhu and I built when Wiltse was surveying. Kilohana is an old resting place;thence mauka to Ahuaele;an ahua with a pile of stones on it;thence mauka to Pahukinikini, [page 139] a small ahua with a pile of rocks on it;thence to Puuolani hill, this is along the land of Pahinahina;that was sold to Makuaole and is now owned by Kanehaloa of Puuehuehue; thence to Lolelole, the mauka corner of land sold; thence mauka to Ahaloa, an old kauhale at the mauka corner of Pahinahina;thence along Makeloa(belonging to Kamehameha& Estate);thence the boundary runs mauka to Kalolo,a water hole in a gulch,thence across the gulch and mauka along the land of Kalala;thence mauka to Puukoa;a hill of Koa,at the mauka corner of Kanehalo's land; thence along Kailikea, a land mauka of Puukoa(Wiltse, in surveying, cut off a corner of Kalala,and ran the line to Holeipalaoa gulch);there is a rock there on the mauka side of the gulch marked KK; thence it is bounded by Kehena to Kilohana on Honokane pati (Note See Certificate of boundaries of Kehena);Thence along Honokane pali towards Waimea,to the Waimea side of Puuwau hill,the boundary being some distance this way of the kauhale;Bounded at shore by a small gulch called Haaho, a rock marked K is at this place;thence up the gulch to an ahua; thence up to where Keawewai gulch crosses Haolo gulch; thence the boundary runs up the north side of the gulch;thence to a place called Kapakamakahonu;thence to Pohakuloa, a large rock in the gulch; thence to an ahua; thence to Kawaihae Government road; thence to Puuala; thence to Niupaa, a bullock pen, the boundary passing through the center of the pen. Thence it crosses the Government road to the wire fence some distance to the north of Upida's[Vida's?]old house;thence to Puumanu; thence to the south side of Ahumoa; thence on the north side of Waiakananaula, a F� water place;thence to Puuiki and from thence to Honokane pali. Boundary Commission hearings for Kahuanui Ahupua`a(also known as Kahua 2°d),which shares a boundary with Kahuali`i1i`i Ahupua`a also began in November of 1873,but the boundaries were not set until June of 1905. The petitioner and owner of the land was James W.Austin,who had acquired the land from Victoria Kamamalu �J and M.Kekuanao`a in 1862(Graves and Franklin 1998).By the time the boundaries were set in 1905 Austin had died and the lands had passed on to the Austin Estate.The 1873 boundary testimony for Kahuanui reads as follows: Kekua,kane,sworn,I was born at the time of Aepapa and have always lived at Kahua until lately. Kahuanui is bounded on the Kona side by Waika.Commencing at the mouth of a gulch the boundary between the Ahupuaa and Kupono begins at a landing place called Kaiopae;thence mauka along the Kuponos to Ahukuli,a pile of stones;thence mauka to Puueoka,a heiau;thence to along stone named Pohakuloa;thence to Kamakaiwi,a resting place;thence to Kapio;thence to Ahumoa,the boundary running through the hills;thence to Puuiki;thence to Kanoa,where fire used to be;Thence to Kahawaikukae,to pati of Kahawaiki;thence to Kahawaiholopapa;thence to Ainamakanui at the head of Honokane Gulch. The kupono Kahawainui,Kukui runs up here.Waika ends at Pahoakala,a place where they used to gather mamaki.This is as far as I[page 145]know the boundaries on this side.I have heard that the land runs down to Mahiki in Hamakua. When Lyons surveyed Waika he cut across the kupono of j Kahua and included them in Waika. Know a place called Ahuanaha. The real boundary is from Oneloa to Kapai,a pile of stones by the road;thence to Kamamukaa,where the gulch is the boundary between Waika and Kahua.The boundary crosses the gulch to the Kohala side at Ahuanaha;thence it runs to Ahuakapaakea; thence mauka to Kalehua; thence up the gulch to Moalau (The pile of stones is way on the Kohala side of the gulch,but the boundary is at the gulch).Thence past Macy's (G.W.Macy's)old house and mauka to Hookeke;thence to kahawai Palapalai;thence mauka to the Pali of Kaloloulaula on Pili; thence to Kapohoakala; thence along to Kahaliaina, a place below j 20 CIA for TIviK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii i ' 3. Culture-Historical Context LJ Puupala, where Kawaihae joins Kahua. From Kahaliaina the boundary runs along the foot of the pall to just above Puuwau on Kahuanui.Puuwau is a hill a short distance back from Pili;thence to j ( Hinamakanui, a cabbage garden on the brow of Honokane pall. The boundary at shore between Kahuanui and Kahualiilii is a rock in the middle of the sea called Kahuapopolo. (Note:Kaauwai, kane puts the boundary a few rods on the Kohala side of this rock.) Thence to Waiakanalopaia, a pool of water at the end of the gulch,thence to Pohakupalahalaha, a wall below the road to Kawaihae,now called Kamakahonu;thence to Waikalio gulch;thence the boundary runs to a stone called Pohakuloa; thence mauka across Pohakulaoa gulch to Puanau, a resting place;thence to Puuala;thence Kipawale,a resting place at the Government road;thence to a hill called Ahuamanu;thence to Waiakapiai;thence to Ahumoa,part of which is on Kahua and part on another land.This is all I know of the boundaries. Frank Woods continued to ranch the Kahua lands throughout the first half of the twentieth century.The 1913 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle shows some of the ranch's infrastructure,including a trail labeled"Beach Trail" that leads to the coast within the current project area(Figure 12).This trail alignment appears to be similar to the road alignment(to Macy and Vida's Ranch)that is shown on the 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S. C. ?'� Wiltse (see Figure 10). By the 1920s, Woods was leasing much of the area to Ronald Kamehameha o Ka Hae Hawaii von Holt and Herbert Montague Richards,Sr.,who had both come to Hawaii from Oahu to pursue cattle ( ranching.By the late 1920s to early 1930s,von Holt and Richards had purchased the lands they were leasing from Woods as well as Kahuanui from the Austin heirs,thus consolidating the Kahua ahupua`a with Waika Ahupua`a into what has become known as Kahua Ranch (Langlas 1994). A map of Kahuali`ili`i, Kahuanui, and Waika ? ahupua a filed on July 15, 1931 with Land Court Application 1043 (Figure 13)shows some additional ranching �! infrastructure within these ahupua`a including a fence line that extends to the coast within the current project area and a trail,labeled"Ancient Trail",that follows the southern edge of the fence to the coast where it meets the ala loa. Both of the trail alignments depicted on the 1931 map are different than the alignments depicted on older Eli maps. The ala loa, which is also labeled as the "Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail", is shown further inland at the southern end of the current project area than it is on the 1903 map(see Figure 11).Also,the maukalmakai trail is located further north than the road shown on the 1859 map(see Figure 10)and the trail shown on the 1913 U.S.G.S. map (see Figure 12), suggesting that both of these trails had been realigned by 1931. It was during the court proceedings associated with these land court applications that the pre-Jeep road Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail was described as having a five foot width. The legal proceedings were conducted over a seven year period and were focused on establishing legal ownership of several adjoining parcels and roadway corridors traversing those parcels.The final ruling of the courts during these proceedings was that the Territory of Hawaii would relinquish any claims to the Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail in exchange for ownership of the Kohala to Kawaihae Road (the current Kohala Mountain Road),thus the current project area remained in the ownership of Kahua Ranch with no encumbrances. Although no longer a public right-of-way, the coastal ala loa continued to serve as a non- vehicular access corridor between Mahukona and Kawaihae.The ala loa trail was improved for vehicular travel in the early 1940s in conjunction with the U.S. Army's efforts to provide an adequate coastal defense system -y during WWII. Subsequent to WWII, Kahua Ranch maintained the roadway across their lands for ranching, transportation,and recreational uses. According to Langlas(1994),the partners,Richards and von Holt,eventually expanded Kahua Ranch through leases and purchases of private land to almost 30,000 acres. Orr(2003:46) describes that although Herbert, Sr. ' served on the board of Kahua Ranch,Atherton Richards(Herbert's brother)was von Holt's"the real partner."In L 1953 von Holt died and Herbert, Jr. (better known as Monty) returned to Hawaii after finishing school on the mainland; gradually Monty took over as manager of the Ranch (OCA 2000). The 1956 U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle shows some of the Kahua Ranch lands and infrastructure(Figure 14),including a fence line and"Beach L Trail"extending to the coast within the current project area.A windmill(recorded as part of Site 16133)is shown adjacent to the fence line at the coast within the current project area. Both the fence line and trail are different - alignments than are shown on the 1931 Land Court Application 1043 map(see Figure 12).A trail is also shown extending parallel to the coast through the project area on the 1956 map(following an alignment similar to that of ``- the Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail shown on the 1931 map). In 1973, when construction of the current Akoni-Pule t Highway was completed,most if not all of the vehicular traffic between Mahukona and Kawaihae shifting away j from the coastal Jeep road to the newly constructed highway.By 1982,the coastal trail is no longer shown on the L CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 21 L 3. Culture-Historical Background U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle.The Richards and von Holt families jointly operated Kahua Ranch until the 1980s at which point it was legally split into two entities. The current project area was severed from the ranch and sold around this time. Today, the Richards family operates Kahua Ranch and the von Holt family operates Ponoholo Ranch. Aw � a e ' t 4, � ya p 10 41 If 11 l q i / ! d spy r rr r , fdl'�Y'9yJ �r" r t "'�* i "� . i rrr 7r�r &"% ' 'pm,' P, � � a S�� r � l v �l +� r r' r r r rn %Sar � r �. r A yJ� ✓/r /ai�a r�a � � ✓iw' `� 1r�� ,�`nrtr,� _9 r r 9 rear rr �J � �/! r�, " i� ➢ J '� ;r fi° SSS rJ" ra rrr Gr �r ✓91 „ `p m �° " ✓ Aja^% J n 6w l" ✓ r< ,n:+r S S + uv "pf /,P r r",w.�+w'&'" w a `r Y'" �'^r�,, r r r�M�rfw: ar!Gd�IV'oliddl r t✓�dit� �vIIr'ir� r� �r .r""�.�,r d YI o vii tir �wSir�r ii'9v'�r rlrnr+^>7r,r 1 Yi^p( u�'P"'f`' "rr 8fir�€Lc �AYa % ry0 r�✓dn�r%�iarw,.r n jr ' ,rwr'"' rm'i , r � ,�7,✓-0'' "^y a rt lel J a fA ' il F S wJ7 r S"dA /ir4J r "AC ...�.,� ma M.,,.�. �➢ � ���� r� r46 1Y�iMy yH re 'i n�ri Detail Gat p d[$�� ""t area � -,.�.« Jr vrl r ivy r✓ w zr yd�ry r h f ,;ru �'�mrV� 'z s a ' Sill I r / s /j arra r Fra r X11 ISS ... Yr r'7ld„ 5 ` �." "✓ i61 M "i � x' "r ;i r �^ 'f "wN J � kr M7 �✓ ... 4 fi.J "'Y^ a^k"� �l .er�k4w' JP, NJ lk A artt Figure 12. 1913 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area. 22 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 3. Culture-Historical Context 71 hs p 47 J w � x i r r r ry 11 0 Pw i S LM 7 7imA f� 7} Y 'a� k . . 4 i Detail ol y°o"dctaue ��a v \V 641, r ° ty �., } bK' Lanss�C,aw 1NaPakal�7cr 4 s d i p b Y 15 n a " ti t VA f x t 1[ 4$ g ^y h aya �f rd F i J d A., ., o Project;area Figure 13.Portion of the 1931 Land Court Application map 1043 showing the current project area. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 23 3. Culture-Historical Background itAri P P N L X5 4 m .n 1Y , s 1: F•e � s�"d'1 .e tlM� r, l t ;ry �M r t m 4 m�r� � *� Arv. x✓ � � 1` T r.0 PYG,>leY.`.0 iMd'G"r1 ry k c ° N h k ry w ` k o- f ate' h � 4M 1 � b h f e✓ o.w .r un m.r s+veu �, m u l• d I Figure 14. 1956 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area. 24 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 4. Discussion of Prior Cultural Studies 4. DISCUSSION OF PRIOR CULTURAL STUDIES Maria E.Ka'itnipono Orr(2003)prepared a cultural impact assessment for a then proposed radio communication tower and facility to be placed on Pu'u Waiakanonula(perhaps the puu referred to as Waiakananaula in the above- cited boundary testimony) in the mauka portion of Kahudli'ili'i.Her study included a detailed culture-historical background for the ahupuaa, as well as a specific history of land use from Precontact times to the historic and modem use of the area by Kahud Ranch. She also conducted oral interviews with Sherri Hannum, Genevieve Leina'ala Hoopai, Bernard Hoopai, Bemelle Hoopai, Harold Glenn Kailiawa, Hannah Springer, and Harry Martens(Pono)von Holt II,.Orr(2003)concluded that no cultural properties or practices would be affected by the project, but cautioned that"for over a hundred years, native Hawaiians have lived in a culturally repressed state. It has been only within the last thirty years, due to evolved awareness, that native Hawaiians have been aggressively trying to reclaim their wahipana(sacred and/or legendary places)." As previously stated,Kepa Maly prepared a detailed culture-historical background for Kaiholena Ahupua'a (Maly 2000)that included information relative to the general region known as Kohala waho or Outer Kohala,of which the current project area is a part.Maly's(2000)extensive culture-historical information suggests that the archaeological resources present in the current study area are best understood within the context of the larger cultural landscape ofKohala Waho;a landscape with a long history,rich in cultural traditions.One could conclude from this that the significance of any one resource is enhanced by the presence of other resources, and together form a cohesive landscape that should be treated and managed in its totality. In 2006,the present author prepared a cultural impact assessment for a coastal property within Kahu5nui and Waikd ahupuaa adjoining the current study area to the south(Rechtman 2006).That study area and the current study area share a common history,and were subject to similar land use dating back to the Precontact settlement of the area.As part of the study, William AhYou Akau,Jr.,Herbert Montague(Monty)Richards Jr., and Harry Martens(Pono)von Holt II were interviewed.Rechtman(2006)concluded that as long as the archaeological sites were treated in accordance with DLNR-SHPD approved treatment plans;and that access to and along the shoreline was in no way inhibited;then there would be no cultural impacts. In 2004,the present author prepared a cultural impact assessment(Rechtman 2004)for a small coastal parcel within Pdo'o Ahupua'a,some six mile north of the current project area.Interviewees for that study included Arthur Mahi,Isabella Mahi Medeiros,and Valerie Luhiau Ako.Collectively,these individuals' (all with cultural ties to the study ahupuaa) primary concerns revolved around the protection of the archaeological resources and the maintenance of access to the shoreline.The relevance of this study for the current study is not so much the specifies of Pdo'o Ahupua'a, but rather the general concept that the land needs to be cared for in appropriate,ways; the Ell concept of milama `Dina. This Pdo'o project required a Conservation District Use Permit, and resulted in a contested case hearing.The testimony presented in both written and oral form as part of the contested case hearing process is also reviewed here as several perspectives were offered that should be considered when assessing cultural impacts along this portion of the Kohala coastline. U The contested case for the Pdo'o project took place in 2008,and resulted in the landowners withdrawing their Conservation District Use Application.While much of the cultural testimony revolved around specific resources located on the Pdo'o parcel, there was other testimony of a more general nature that had broader implications. L These included the concepts of nidlania 'dina, cultural trauma, and cultural disintegration fostering multigenerational psychopathologies. Several of those who testified suggested that the development of the currently undeveloped portions of coastal Kobala would be inconsistent with the traditional cultural practice of n L caring for the land(mdlania 'dina),although no basis for this assertion was cited.It should be noted that the land within the current study area was "developed" for use by generations of Hawaiians as a place of habitation as evidenced by the numerous structural remains of residential complexes across the property. It is perhaps the L testimony presented by Kamana'opono Crabbe,Ph.D. and Dr. David Liu with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma that may account for the distinction made between traditional Hawaiian use of land and modem Western use of land. In his testimony Dr.Liu contended that: . . . the theory of cultural trauma posits that . . . certain historical events experienced by a group continue to be experienced by that group,even decades or perhaps centuries after the initial event: CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 25 4. Discussion of Prior Cultural Studies the events or processes are a"traumatic loss of identity or meaning,a tear in the social fabric."These experiences transform communities,oftentimes in negative aspects. There are both biological and psychological bases for the transmittal of the traumas.Biologically, trauma is transmitted through the formation of emotional memory, involving both the autonomic and higher level nervous systems.Psychologically,cultural trauma is transmitted through struggles for meaning and interpretation,which are expressed through means such as stories and songs. The experience of cultural trauma is as a group,but its expression is on an individual basis. Such expression of individual knowing of trauma may take forms ranging from non-adherence to medication to self-destructive behaviors, such as substance abuse or overeating. Hawaiians may subconsciously choose to resist dominant models of"health"through behaviors which are ultimately self-destructive. Hawaiians have experienced and continue to experience cultural trauma,from the coming of Captain Cook, through massive depopulation and alienation from the land to invasion, occupation, annexation and continuing depredation of the islands.Infrastructure,from the economic to political, social and spiritual saw significant-degradation and destruction,processes which continue today. Perhaps one of the most fundamental institutions which continues to be eroded by the current political economy'is that of the connection of Hawaiians to land, through the genealogy of Fj Papahanaumoku, Wdkea, Ho'oh6kiiikalani, and Haloa, which leads to the Hawaiian. Because of these connections and the sacred nature of the land...Hawaiians have a kuleana,or duty to mdlama, or take care of the 'Etina. To fail in this duty, to allow desecration or destruction, is to invite retribution from the Akua(God,or gods)or'aumdkua(family gods). Kamana'opono Crabbe,Ph.D.added that proposed modem development on or nearby traditional sites: . . .would be considered sacra religious and conflict with traditional-cultural norms. . . Consistent with theories of cultural loss and/or disintegration as melt as psychosocial models of pathological illness,the discontinuance of specific cultural practices has multiple implications. The struggle to perpetuate cultural lifestyles is challenged constantly on a daily basis due to acculturation or the dynamic cultural exchange . . . between two or more distinct cultural-ethnic groups. This psychosocial process occurs on many levels typically affecting the non-dominant group within the larger dominant society, which in this case is Native Hawaiians. The long-term outcome of acculturation leads to the progressive social or cultural disintegration[of]infrastructures.. .as well as ongoing deterioration in a particular society. If the above contentions are taken as valid,and all land within Hawaii is to be considered a valued resource, then there is potentially a direct conflict between Western private property rights(which were established under the Hawaiian Kingdom during the reign of Kamehameha 111)and traditional Hawaiian cultural values.It is then perhaps the role of the state's regulatory agencies to take such factors intoaccount when making land use decisions that might have unexpected long-term psychological effects on a particular cultural group within our modem-day multicultural society. U U 26 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kabuali'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii L 5. Summary of Consultation LJ 5. SUMMARY OF CONSULTATION As stated in the OEQC Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts, the goal of the oral interview process is to LJ identify potential cultural resources,practices,and beliefs associated with the affected project area.It is the present author's farther contention that the oral interviews should also be used to augment the process of assessing the significance of any traditional cultural properties that may be identified. It is the researcher's responsibility, -J, therefore, to use the gathered information to identify and describe potential cultural impacts and propose appropriate mitigation as necessary. As part of the current study the author met with the North Kohala Community Access Group.Although this group's membership'is multicultural, they represent many of the Native Hawaiian community's concerns with respect to access rights,and they were a forum to present the project and to help get the word out to folks within the Native Hawaiian community who may have comments and concerns about the project. The South Kohala Community Development Planning Group was also contacted to help get the word out to potential interested parties,and the Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Kailapa Community Association was also contacted.As a result of these contacts and communications,a field visit was set up with the intention of viewing the property and discussing any potential cultural impacts. On November 15, 2014, Robert Rechtman, Ph.D. met"on-site with LJ several members of the North Kohala Community Access Group, the South Kohala Community Development Planning Group, and residents of the Kailapa Homesteads. Among others (e.g.,Diane Kanealii, Jojo Tanimoto, Toni Withington), present at the site visit were Kelvin Kaho'opi'i and his wife Anna. Kelvin immediately explained that he believed that he owned the property, not the current landowner, and that he [Kelvin] would consider it to be trespassing if the assembled group were to leave the highway where we had met and go onto the property. He further suggested that there would be "serious consequences" if we violated this order. It was explained to him that the landowner(and the project consultants)felt comfortable in the ownership rights and that if he had a legitimate complaint he should file legal papers.He then showed some sort of Hawaiian Kingdom title document and explained that it is incumbent on the person claiming to be landowner to show him Royal Patent documents to prove ownership(see discussion of chain of property ownership above).We agreed to disagree on this issue,and none of the assembled people felt comfortable continuing with the planned site visit,and so further field consultation did not occur. Present at this aborted meeting was Kaena Peterson,who is kamadina to the area,a resident of Kailapa,and President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club.Kaena was contacted the following day and she asked me to meet with her and the Vice President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club to share information about the project and hear their concerns.On Sunday November 23,2014,Robert Rechtman,Ph.D.met with Kaena Peterson and Lei Kihoi of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club at the Kailapa residence of Kaena Peterson. Their concerns were related to both the protection of trails along with other traditional sites and burial sites, and the perpetuation of access to the property for traditional and customary practices as protected under state statutes. With respect to the former,they wanted to make sure that all burial sites are properly treated and that the traditional trail routes remain open for unrestricted pedestrian access. With respect to the perpetuation of traditional and customary practices they wanted to make sure that traditional coastal activities were not impacted and that Native Hawaiian individuals and organized groups such as hula halau had unrestricted access to the trails and shoreline. Both Kaena and Lei stressed the importance of maintaining the traditional access routes that exist on the landscape. A second, this time successful, field visit was conducted on January 31, 2015 with members of the North Kohala Community Access Group and residents of the South Kohala Department of Hawaiian Home Lands I L i Kailapa community.Much of the discussion during this visit revolved around trails and access.Present during this visit was JoJo Tanimoto,a kupuna of Native Hawaiian ancestry. She shared recollections of traveling the project area coastline with her father when she was a child for shoreline fishing activities.Joj o also talked about a shoreline pond in the general area that William Akau related to her was culturally significant,but was unsure of its exact location. Also present during this visit was Diane Kanealii and Parish Canon of the Kailapa community. Mr. Canon, a younger generation Native Hawaiian and current president of the Kailapa Community Association expressed an interest in having community members take an active role in the preservation of cultural sites and resources within the development area. No other individuals have come forward with any specific information about significant cultural resources or traditional and customary practices that have occurred or are still taking place on the current study property. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 27 5. Summary of Consultation Information obtained from three prior interviews is also directly relevant to the current study area.As part of the cultural impact assessment for a coastal property within Kahuanui and Waika ahupuaa adjoining the current study area to the south(Rechtman 2006),William AhYou Akan,Jr.,Herbert Montague(Monty)Richards Jr.,and Harry Martens(Pono)von Holt II were interviewed.That study area and the current study area share a common history, and were subject to similar land use dating back to the Precontact settlement of the area. The interview questions asked during that study and the responses given apply equally to the current study area.The interviews were informal unrecorded phone conversations and the consultants were asked specific questions concerning their personal knowledge of the general project area and the former Kahud Ranch lands. William Akau was a life-long resident of Kawaihae with genealogical ties to the area dating back to at least 1791.As a child in the 1930s,William Akan walked the coastal trails,fished the near shore and gardened sweet F1 potatoes in the then 'auwai watered lands near Pu'u Kohold.He was asked if he knew of any specific cultural sites or practices that have taken place or are ongoing within the general project area.He knew of nothing specific,but did relate that the area was and is used for shoreline fishing.When asked about his concerns for development of the area, he was strong in his reply that the traditional trail systems be protected and kept open for pedestrian access.He related that in the 1980s it was he who entered into a lawsuit with the Mauna Kea Hotel to stop their blocking of the coastal trails. William Akau prevailed in his lawsuit, and access rights to the trails along the Kawaihae and'Ouli shoreline were protected. lJ Monty Richards,born at Kahud Ranch in 1929,is a descendant of both the Reverend William Richards who arrived in Hawaii in 1823, and Amos Starr Cooke who arrived in Hawaii in 1837.Monty's father moved from Oahu to Hawaii in the 1920,and along with his brother Atherton and Ronald von Holt established Kahud Ranch. Monty was asked if he knew of any specific cultural sites within former coastal ranch lands. He indicated that there are many archaeological sites recorded and that the late Henry Auwae showed him a place in Kahufinui(to the south of the current study area)that he called a turtle shrine. Pono von Holt,born in 1938,is the third child of Ronald von Holt and Dorothy Erdman. Pono was named after his paternal grandfather (Harry Martens von Holt), who was called Hale Ponoholo by Hawaiians. Hale's father(Pono's great grandfather)arrived in Hawaii from Hamburg,Germany in 1851.Pono also described Henry Auwae showing him a honu shrine located near the mouth of the Kai'6pae drainage. When asked about past ranching activities on the coastal lands,he explained that the entire area had been grazed by cattle for many years. While it is abundantly clear from the archaeological and historical records that the property was used during Precontact and early historic times for the entire range of traditional Hawaiian cultural activities and practices (residential, burial, ceremonial, subsistence production and procurement, etc.); none of the consultants had knowledge of any specific traditional cultural practices currently being exercised on the property; although William Akau suggested(and the present author observed)that the shoreline is actively being accessed for fishing, and both Monty and Pono concurred that such activities are and have commonly been practiced along the Kahud shoreline. Also, during earlier Pdo'o consultations, Arthur Mahi and Valerie Luhiau Ako discussed the general practice of indlama `diva,and many within the Hawaiian community,along with the Office of Hawaiian Affairs, recognize such caretakership of the land as an ongoing cultural practice with traditional roots. ADDITIONAL CONSULTATION As mentioned in the introduction,the first version of the current CIA study was prepared for an earlier iteration Li of the current proposed project.Given the newly proposed reduction in lot density(from nine lots to six lots)and the commitment that nothing will be constructed makai of the ala loa,additional consultation was sought relative to not only the density reduction, but also the future treatment of historic properties within the proposed development area that were previously evaluated a significant due to associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts (_HRS Chapter 6E evaluation Criterion e).Eight such sites were identified in the updated AIS(Rechtman and Clark 2010),the five burial sites(SIHP Sites 2496,4004,4013, 16148,and 16162),the two trail sites(SIHP Sites 15261 and 29271),and one site(SIHP Site 2498)that has been characterized as consisting of one habitation feature and one shrine feature(Graves and Franklin 1998);all of these sites will be preserved. The following individuals and organizations were contacted and/or re-contacted for additional consultation, and Public Notices soliciting consultation for the burial sites were published in the July 2018 issue of Ka Wai 01a. o OHA,on June 16,July 1,July 4,2018 in both the Honolulu Star Advertiser and West Hawai'i Today newspapers. 28 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,KahuWNIN,North Kohala,Hawaii I ! F7 5. Summary of Consultation Kailapa Community Association Diane Maka'ala Kdneali'i was contacted via email(on November 2 and 26,and December 8 and 10,2018)in her 4. capacity as Executive Director of the Kailapa Community Association. The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her and a request was made to make a presentation at a community association meeting.On February 2, 2019, Robert B. Rechtman, Ph.D. conducted a walking tour of the proposed subdivision area with Diane Maka'ala K5neali'i and Cynthia Sharp. Cynthia is also a board member of the Kailapa Community Association. Both Diane and Cynthia expressed pleasure that the extreme coastal portion of the property will be preserved,but indicated that the best approach would be to preserve the whole property through a land purchase perhaps using County Public Access,Open Space and Natural Resources Preservation Commission(PONQ funds.Short of this happening,both were encouraged by the overall limited space available for future development.Diane indicated that she would work with the landowner to help establish a community stewardship program that could participate in the preservation of the cultural landscape,conduct coastal clean-up,and help restore and protect archaeological resources. The landowner is committed to continued consultation with this and any other Kohala cultural community groups with respect to the long term protection and care of the project area's cultural landscape,and the Kailapa Community Association will be further consulted with respect to the archaeological preservation plan. Hawaii Island Burial Council(HIBC) Robert B.Rechtman,Ph.D.appeared before the HIBC on November 5,2018 to conduct preliminary consultation with respect to the five burial sites within the development area, and related to the Council members that there Fill), were no responses to the public notices. The existing treatment plan (PHRI 2000) for four of those sites was discussed and it was explained that a fifth site had been discovered as a result of the updated AIS(Rechtman and Clark 2010).It was also explained that the existing HIBC-approved 20 foot buffers for the sites would be increased to 30 feet in the new Burial Treatment Plan(BTP).Council members were pleased with the increased buffer size, and were interested in ensuring that appropriate access to the burial sites would be allowed.Provisions for such access will be included in the forthcoming BTP. Kaena Peterson Kaena Peterson lives in the Kailapa (Honokoa) Community and serves as the President of the South Kohala Hawaiian Civic Club.She was consulted during the earlier iteration of the prof ect.Kaena was contacted via email (on October 30 and December 8 2018).The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared with her and a request was made to make a presentation at a Civic Club meeting. Scheduling could not accommodate such a presentation, however, in a phone conversation (on December 11)Kaena shared that she was happy to see all development activity moved to the mauka side of the ala loa. She also strongly urged the developer to keep the current six-lot plan(not to change it later to higher density) and make sure that future homeowners would not encroach on the P trails, which to her are at the heart of cultural practice. Kaena related that the uniqueness of living on an island comes with a kuleana toward fellow residents,something she believes was a part of traditional Hawaiian culture Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Further brief consultation was conducted with Rick Gmirkin of the National Park Service's Ala Kahakai National LHistorical Trail Program.The new six-lot subdivision plan was shared via email and a brief phone conversation (on December 10,2018)was conducted.Rick expressed his pleasure that there will be no breaches of the ala loa and that the public access to the ala loa will follow along an existing traditional maukalmakai trail alignment.He L I was also encouraged that the new subdivision configuration supported the preservation of more of the archaeological landscape,as this helps provide the context for the Ala Kahakai. The landowner will continue to consult with the Ala Kahakai National Historical Trail Program to fine tune the public alignment of Ala Kahakai to I include important aspect of the trail as well as exclude other significant features(i.e.,burial sites)from public interaction. Office of Hawaiian Affairs(ORA) Shane Nelson of OHA's West Hawaii office was contacted via email(on September 12 and October 30, 2018) and a phone conversation was organized on November 5, 2018. The reduced-lot development plan was shared with Shane and he expressed his pleasure that the proposed development would have less of an impact on the cultural landscape and the archaeological sites contained therein. Shane requested continued consultation with OHA when the burial treatment and archaeological preservation plans become available. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 29 6. Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts P 6. IDENTIFICATION AND MITIGATION OF POTENTIAL CULTURAL IMPACTS P The OEQC guidelines identify several possible types of cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment. These include subsistence, commercial, residential, agricultural, access-related, recreational, and religious and spiritual customs. The guidelines also identify the types of potential cultural resources, associated FJ with cultural practices and beliefs that are subject to assessment. Essentially these are nature features of the landscape and historic sites,including traditional cultural properties.A working definition of traditional cultural property is: P "Traditional cultural property"means any historic property associated with the traditional practices and beliefs of an ethnic community or members of that community for more than fifty years.These traditions shall be founded in an ethnic community's history and contribute to maintaining the ethnic F11 community's cultural identity. Traditional associations are those demonstrating a continuity of practice or belief until present or those documented in historical source materials,or both. The origin of the concept of traditional cultural property is found in National Register Bulletin 38 published by the U.S. Department of Interior-National Park Service. "Traditional" as it is used, implies a time depth of at least 50 years,and a generalized mode of transmission of information from one generation to the next,either orally or by act. "Cultural"refers to the beliefs,practices, lifeways, and social institutions of a given community. The use of the term"Property"defines this category of resource as an identifiable place.Traditional cultural properties are not intangible,they must have some kind of boundary; and are subject to the same kind of evaluation as any other historic resource,with one very important exception.By definition,the significance of traditional cultural properties should be determined by the community that values them. It is however with the definition of"Property"wherein there lies an inherent contradiction,and corresponding difficulty in the process of identification and evaluation of potential Hawaiian traditional cultural properties, because it is precisely the concept of boundaries that runs counter to the traditional Hawaiian belief system. The sacredness of a particular landscape feature is often cosmologically tied to the rest of the landscape as well as to other features on it.To limit a property to a specifically defined area may actually partition it from what makes it significant in the first place.However offensive the concept of boundaries maybe,it is nonetheless the regulatory benchmark for defining and assessing traditional cultural properties. As the OEQC guidelines do not contain criteria for assessing the significance for traditional cultural properties,this study will adopt the state criteria for evaluating the significance of historic properties, of which traditional cultural properties are a subset. To be significant the potential historic property or traditional cultural property must possess integrity of location,design, setting,materials,workmanship,feeling,and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: LI a Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; LJ c Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction;represent the work of a master;or possess high artistic value; [i d Have yielded,or is likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history; e Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due Ell, to associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. While it is the practice of the DLNR-SHPD to consider most historic properties significant under Criterion D U at a minimum,it is clear that traditional cultural properties by definition would also be significant under Criterion E. A farther analytical framework for addressing the preservation and protection of customary and traditional native practices specific to Hawaiian communities resulted from the Ka Paakai 0 Kadina v Land Use E Commission court case. The court decision established a three-part process relative to evaluating such potential impacts: first,to identify whether any valued cultural,historical,or natural resources are present;and identify the F I extent to which any traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised;second,to identify the extent I LI 30 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii I U 6. Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts to which those resources and rights will be affected or impaired; and third, specify any mitigative actions to be taken to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. As a result of the archaeological studies conducted within the project area forty archaeological sites were identified(see Figure 3).These include,five sites with burials(SIHP Sites 2496,4004,4013, 16148 and 16132) evaluated as significant under Criteria d and e,two multi-feature trail sites(SW Site 15261 and Site 29271)also evaluated as significant under Criteria d and e, one habitation/ceremonial sites evaluated as significant under Criteria c,d,and e,two habitation sites(SIHP Sites 2499 and 4005)evaluated as significant under Criteria c and d,and thirty additional archaeological sites(SW Sites 4000,4002,4003,4010,4011,4012,4015, 16131, 16132, 16133, 16134, 16135, 16136, 16137, 16138, 16139, 16140, 16141, 16142, 16143, 16144, 16145, 16146, 16147, 16149, 16150, 16151, 16163, 16164 and 16167)evaluated as significant under Criterion d. Thirty-seven of these archaeological sites are considered to be valued cultural resources and retain the potential to be impacted by the current development proposal. DLNR-SHPD is the state agency that has been empowered to make determinations with respect to impacts to archaeological sites and to assure that appropriate measures are implemented to mitigate any potential impacts. To mitigate potential impacts to the burial sites identified within the current project area, a revised burial treatment plan should be prepared in compliance with HAR 13§13-300 and implemented prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities. To mitigate the potential impacts to the non-burial archaeological sites identified within the project area, archaeological preservation and data recovery plans should be prepared in compliance with HAR13§13-277 and HAR 13§13- 278,respectively,and implemented prior to any ground-disturbing activities. As a result of the consultation and given the reduction in the number of lots from nine to six, eleven archaeological sites(SW Sites 2496,4010,4012,16138,16140,16141,16143,16144,16146,1615 1,and 16167) that have been previously approved for data recovery by DLNR-SHPD will be reassigned a preservation treatment, reducing the total number of sites that will be subject to data recovery from eighteen to seven and increasing the number of preservation sites from sixteen to twenty-seven. With respect to the land(as a valued natural/cultural resource)within the current project area and the current proposed Kohala Shoreline LLC development, conditions exist that may mediate the potential detrimental psychosocial effects postulated by Kamana'opono Crabbe, Ph.D. and Dr. David Liu with respect to cultural disintegration and cultural trauma.The fact is that within the local community these lands are known to have been private lands for over 100 years, and that access to the shoreline for traditional cultural practices has never been prohibited,a situation that will continue under the current proposed development.Further,in the spirit of midama `dina,the current development plans call for a down zoning from the current approved Single-Family Residential 15,000 square foot lot size to Agricultural Residential 3 acre lot size,and a planned unit development that locates Li building sites away from the immediate shoreline and in such a way as to preserve a significant portion of the archaeological landscape;and although seemingly not currently practiced within the study area,ongoing malama 'dina could and should be resurrected for the current project area. In this vein, Lei Kihoi suggested that if a C! community association is established to maintain the preserved cultural sites on the property,that a member(s)of the local Hawaiian community with ties to the land be retained for this task.Parish Canon also expressed a desire to have members of the local Native Hawaiian community be encouraged to participate in the preservation of resources within the development area,and to maintain an on-going dialog with the developer and the individual landowners.In this way the traditional concept of mdlama 'dina could be perpetuated. Other potential cultural impacts that may result from the proposed project specifically relate to coastal access and use. In a general sense access to and use of the entire shoreline within the study area for recreational, L subsistence,transportation, and spiritual purposes can be considered an ancient as well as ongoing practice;thus the shoreline itself could be considered a valued cultural resource and would be significant under Criterion E.The primary concern raised by William Akau was that of maintaining long-shore pedestrian access for fishing, transportation, and recreation. He was a longtime advocate for the perpetuation of Hawaiian rights of access to, and use of,the traditional system of trails.These same concerns for maintaining traditional and customary access rights were raised by Kaena Peterson and Lei Kihoi during more recent consultation. Figure 15 is a portion of Land Court Application 1043 Map 1 (dated 193 1) indicating the presence of a coastal trail within the current project area.This trail is also shown on the 1935 edition of the Tax Map(Figure 16)and based on an overlay with current maps it appears as though this trail eventually became the coastal Jeep road,which was recorded in the most recent archaeological study(Rechtman 2014)as Site 29271. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 31 L 6. Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts Along much of the Kohala coast,this Jeep road followed the course of an existing ala loa that had been in use for centuries. The ala loa is depicted on several historical maps dating back at least to 1903; however, its location was perhaps most accurately recorded on the detailed survey map prepared in 1931 (see Figure 15)to accompany a set of land court applications (L.C.App. 1036 and 1043)that contain information relevant to the current project area.It was during the court proceedings associated with these land court applications that the pre- Jeep road Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail was described as having a five foot width.The legal proceedings were conducted over a seven year period and were focused on establishing legal ownership of several adjoining parcels and roadway corridors traversing those parcels. The final ruling of the courts during these proceedings was that the Territory of Hawaii would relinquish any claims to the Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail in exchange for ownership of the Kohala to Kawaihae Road(the current Kohala Mountain Road),thus within the current project area there are no state-owned(public)trail encumbrances.Although no longer a public right-of-way,the coastal ala loa continued to serve as a non-vehicular access corridor between Mahukona and Kawaihae.The ala loa trail was improved for vehicular travel in the early 1940s in conjunction with the U.S. Army's efforts to provide an adequate coastal defense system during WWII. However,within the current study property,in 1994 the then landowner recorded a map within the Land Court system that specified a shoreline setback for coastal public access in the area between the highwater mark and six feet inland of the"highwater mark as is from time to time established"(Figure 17);re-establishing a public access easement on the property.This access corridor in conjunction with an access alignment coincident with Site 29271 will continue to provide lateral access across the property.Additionally,there will be a public access parking lot within the property and a maukalmakai pedestrian trail leading to the lateral access corridors and shoreline (see Figure 9). The establishment and maintenance of these trail easements will facilitate coastal access and the continued use of the shoreline for recreational,subsistence,transportation,and spiritual purposes;thus alleviating any potential impacts related to shoreline access and related cultural use. Additionally, there will be no development activities permitted makai of the ala loa,which will help to limit any visual impacts on the coastal cultural landscape. Implementation of the above described measures relative to the identified archaeological and cultural resources,and cultural practices and beliefs will help to ensure that no such resources,practices,or beliefs will be adversely affected by the proposed subdivision and subsequent development of the subject property 19 U, H Li 32 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 6. Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impacts Nx1 '��i4ti�4,�'••E ;�f r ' t5 1415th, 'i �• 1 I'��5ys\�i � k5y N .'i rrr 4y u+ t� ujc pu } '����rl`t4atrlr�lrl��t�,'''�gry�4,'i•'� I ftt j♦ 1 f1 I� r;�";.t� Y IIt�'����fa'ijlttt ti� � 3•tu�NrSah� y till Ul 03 0.1 tom•-- --' 91�"'-fb" �y �eF ua G� . wujakatlFo y � �� 89.�I•s��+ k1�a,n�kvr,�t ������.�,�� o�.�� • rte$ „lit, der Figure 15.Portion of Land Court Application 1043 Ma 1 dated 1931 LI Pp p ) f ff 41 Ell, WA Figure 16.Portion of 1935 Tax Map showing coastal"Hawaiian trail,"current project area shaded. I4I L�' is L CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii 33 L) 6. Identification and Mitigation of Potential Cultural Impaccts o w _ •?hey.is z 'a Q Q o tsv •�v �{,, Maz § }a J: N .,x � f!! D Q Vl =_'65 ��3 •��p.p; e �ma r,.t"'"i7 w a 4nE9 � � aR ' bErPc a) 0 °k0' 0 -«_ Z 4 ®rlul! .I F D ' O 't 2,: : O ~ a e § v s$ Z 3 (4 w o a's: 11 � !g � �s 0 v o U 9d Ovom VNONnHvyq 3VHIVMVX '. wa ^^oo.et —SOT.end[c mZet .i'CtAP2i4 s .14 d ff CA .� pciE t %a by !x J M I���, h• 1,. A Li c 4 i t._.J 34 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali`ili`i,North Kohala,Hawaii References Cited REFERENCES CITED Allen,M. LJ 1985a Limited Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey Kahua Shores Coastal Parcel: Kahtta 1, North) Kohala,Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-9-01:8).PERI Report 74-031883.Prepared for Kahua Shores,' Ltd. 1985b Limited Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey Kahua Shores Coastal Parcel: Kahua 1-2 and Waika,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii(THK:3-5-9-01:8).PHRI Report 76-030183.Prepared for Kahua Shores,Ltd. Barrera,W. 1971 Anaehoomalu: A Hawaiian Oasis. Preliminary Report of Salvage Research in South Kohala, Hawaii. Pacc Anthropological Records No. 15. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Beckwith,M. 1976 Hawaiian Mythology.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 5, Bellwood,P. 1978 The Polynesians:Prehistory of Island People.Thames and Hudson,Ltd.,London. Bonk,W. 1968 The Archaeology of North and South Kohala-from the Ahupua'a of Kawaihae to the Ahupua'a of Upolu: Coastal Archaeology Surface Survey.Hawaii State Archaeological Journal 68-3.Division of State Parks,Department of Land and Natural Resources. Burgett,B. and P.Rosendahl 1993 Summary of Archaeological Inventory Surveys,Kapaanui Agricultural Subdivision and Mahukona Property, Lands of Kapaarmi, Kou, Kamano, Mahukona 1st and 2nd, Hihiu, and Kaoma, North El Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. (TMK:3-5-7-02:11 and TMK:3-5-7-03:1-3,10-14,16-18).PERI Report 743-020993.Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii,Inc. Burtchard,G. 1995 Population and Land Use on the Keauhou Coast the Mauka Land Inventory Survey,Keauhou,North Kona, Hawaii Island. Part 1: Narrative Volume. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc. (LAR11).Prepared for Belt Collins and Associates and Kamehameha Investment Corporation, L Honolulu. Colum,P. 1937 Legends ofHawaii.Yale University Press,New Haven and London. Corbin,A. 2000 Archaeological Data Recovery at Kohala Makai-I Project Area, Land of Waika, North Kohala L District,Island of Hawaii(TNM:5-9-01:006).PERI Report No.2034-080100.Prepared for Kohala Waterfront Joint Venture. F-� 2003 Additional of Kohala Ranch Development Lands of al Archaeological Inventory Survey Project L Waika,and Kahud 1 and 2,North Kohala District Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-9-multiple plats and parcels). 2004 Archaeological Mitigation Plan,Kahua Makai Project,Lands of Kahua 2 and Waika,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii.PHRI Report 2284-042104.Prepared for P-Ghana Makai/K-Ohana Makai c/o G.Mooers. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuffii'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 35 I L References Cited Doyle,E. 1953 Makua Laiana: the Story of Lorenzo Lyons. Compiled from manuscript journals 1832-1886. P-1 Honolulu Star Bulletin. Dunn,A.,and P.Rosendahl 1989 Archaeological Inventory Survey,Kapaanui Agricultural Subdivision,Lands of Kapaanui and Kou, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 568-100289. Prepared for Almaloa Development,Inc. Ellis,W. 1963 Journal of William Ellis.Advertiser Publishing Company Ltd.,Honolulu. Fomander,A. 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race:Its Origin and Migrations.Tokyo:Charles E.Tuttle Co.,Inc. Graves,D. and L.Franklin 1998 Archaeological Inventory Survey,Kahua Makai/Kahua Shores Coastal Parcels,Lands of Kahua 1 and 2 and Waika,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-9-01:7,8).PHRI Report 1024- 033198.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii,Ltd. Griffin,P.,T.Riley,P.Rosendahl,and H.Tuggle 1971 Archaeology of Halawa and Lapakahi: Windward Valley and Leeward Slope. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter 14(3):101-112. 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.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu.(with M.K.Pukui) Henke,L. 1929 A Survey of Livestock in Hawaii.Research Publication No.5.University of Hawaii,Honolulu. n Hommon,R. U 1976 The Formation of Primitive States in Pre-Contact Hawaii. Ph.D. Dissertation (Anthropology), University of Arizona,Tucson.University Microfilms,Inc.,Ann Arbor,Michigan. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. IN Kirch, P.V. (ed.), Island Societies: Archaeological U Approaches to Evolution and Trans formation:55-88.Cambridge:University Press. F1 Hono-ko-hau Study Advisory Commission U 1974 The Spirit of Ka-Loko Hono-Ko-Hau.National Park Service,U.S.Department of the Interior. Kamakau,S. 0 1964 Ka Po'e Kahiko:The People of Old.B.P.Bishop Museum Special Publication 51.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1976 The Works of the People of Old, Na hana a ka Po'e Kahiko. B.P. Bishop Museum Special U Publication 61.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 11" 1991 Tales and Traditions of the People of Old.Honolulu:Bishop Museum Press. F-' 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii.The Kameharneha Schools Press,Honolulu(revised edition). U Kent,N. F_' 1983 Hawaii:Islands Under the Influence.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Kirch,P. 1984 The Evolution of the Polynesian Chiefdoms.Cambridge University Press,New York. 36 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahuali'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii References Cited 1985 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1990 Monumental Architecture and Power in Polynesian Chiefdoms: A Comparison of Tonga and Hawaii.World Archaeology 22(2). 1997 Feathered Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu:University of Hawaii Press. 2011 When did the Polynesians Settle Hawaii? A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer.Hawaiian Archaeology Vol.. 12:3-26. KTF(Kohala Task Force) 1975 Kohala:A Candid View.Report of the Kohala Task Force[March]. Kubo,L.and P.Rosendahl 2003 Burial Treatment Plan,Sites 50-10-05-2491 (Feature B)and 50-10-05-16130(Features A and B)at Kohala Bay Estates,Land of Kahua I and 2,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-9- 0 1:7).PM Report 2283-101603.Prepared for P-Ohana Makai c/o Mr.John Michael White,Hawaii Land Company. Kuykendall,R.,and A.Day 1976 Hawaii: A History From Polynesian Kingdom to American Statehood Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs. Langlas,C. 1994 Pu'u of Mauka Kawaihae and Kalald Ahupua'a, District Kohala, Hawaii Island: Report of an Investigation of the Hawaiian Cultural Significance of Candidate Sites for the Kamuela Area (Hawai'i) NEXRAD Installation. Part 1: Candidates Sites for the NEXRAD Installation: Ethnographic Background and Site Assessment.Prepared for SRI International. Loubser,J.,and R.Rechtman 2007 Archaeological Data Recovery Investigation at SHIP Sites 2492, 16177, 16122,2494, 16129,2485, and 16154, within Site Complex 50-10-05-4157, Kahud 2nd and Waikd ahupuaa, North Kohala F1 District,Island of Hawaii,Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0400.Prepared for Kohala Kai LLC. U Malo,D. 1903 Hawaiian Antiquities.B.P.Bishop Museum Special Publication 2.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Maly,K. 1999 Kaao Hooniva Puuwai No Ka-Miki(Heart Stirring Story of Ka-Miki)Published in the Hawaiian newspaper Ka H(5kfi o Hawaii(1914-1917).(Translation done between 1992-1999). 2000 Historical Background. In: Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Coastal Portion of Kaiholena Ahupuaa,North Kohala,Hawaii.IARII Report prepared for Pohaku Kea LLC,Menlo Park.Dye and Maly(2000). Menzies,A. 1920 Hawaii Nei, 128 Years Ago. Edited by William F.Wilson.Honolulu:The New Freedom Press. OCA 2000 Paniolo Hall of Oral History Interviews.Oahu Cattlemen's Association,Ewa Beach. ii Oliver,D. 1961 The Pacific Islands. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 37 References Cited O'Hare and S.Goodfellow 1999 Archaeological Mitigation Program, Data Recovery Excavations, Site 50-10-05-4015, Kahua Makai/Kalma Shores Coastal Parcels. Land of Kahua 1,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:5-9-01:7,8).PERI Report 1572-081799.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii,Ltd. Orr,M. 2003 Cultural Impact Assessment Kahua Ranch DAGS Rainbow Tower&Facilities Pu'u Waiakanonula, Kahua Ranch,Ahupua'a of Kahuali'ili'i,District of Kohala,'Hawaii Island,Hawaii.Prepared for Haan&Associates. PM 2000 Burial Treatment Plan,Kohala LLC Residential Compound Project.Land of Kahua 1,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5-9-01:8). PHRI Report 2003-041100. Prepared for Gentry- Pacific,Limited. 2005 Documentation on Testing of Possible Burial Features,Kahua Makai/Kahua Shores Coastal Parcels. PHRI Report 2510-041305.Prepared for P-Ohana Makai/K-Ohana Makai. Pogue,J. 1978 Mooleo Hawaii.Hale Paipalapala Aupuni,Honolulu(Revised Edition). Pukui,M. 1983 'Olelo Noeau,Hawaiian Proverbs&Poetical Sayings.B.P.Bishop Museum Special Publication 71. Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Pukui,M.,S.Elbert,and E.Mo'okini 1974[1966] Place Names of Hawaii. Revised and Expanded Edition. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Un Rechtman,R. 2004 Cultural Impact Assessment Associated with the Proposed Development of a Single-Family Residence in Conservation District Land,Pdo'o Ahupua'a,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0019.Prepared for Jonathan Cohen,Lincoln,MA. 2006 Cultural Impact Assessment Associated with the Proposed Development of Kohala Kai, Kahudli'ili'i,Kahudnui,and Waikd ahupuaa,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii.Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0368.Prepared for Greg Mooers,Kanmela. 2014 A Preservation Plan for Ten Sites Within the Kohala Kai Subdivision, TMKs: (3) 5-9-17:006 and 007,Kahua 2 and Waikd ahupuaa,North Kohala District,Island of Hawai'i.ASM Report Number 21890.00.Prepared for Kohala Kai,LLC,Kantuela. Rechtman,R.,and M.Clark 2010 Archaeological Inventory Survey Update for TNM:3-5-9-01:008, Kahud lst Ahupua'a, North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii.Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0657.Prepared for Gregory R. Mooers,Kamuela. Rosendahl,P. 1972 Aboriginal Agriculture and Domestic Residence Patterns in Upland Lapakahi, Island of Hawaii. Ph.D.Dissertation,University of Hawaii,Honolulu. 1994 Archaeological Mitigation Program. Phase 1: Mitigation Plan for Data Recovery Excavations, Laboratory Analyses and Report, Sites 4015, 4016, 4017 and 4018. Kahua Makai/Kahua Shores Coastal Parcels,Lands of Kahua 1 and 2,and Waika,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii.PHRI Letter Report 1555-082394.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii,Ltd. 38 CIA for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahudli'ili'L North Kohala,Hawaii References Cited L Schilt,R.,and A.Sinoto 1980 Limited Phase I Archaeological Survey of Mahukona Properties,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii. B.P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu.Prepared for Belt,Collins and Associates. Schmidt,R. 1973 The Missionary Census of Hawaii. Pacific Anthropological Records No. 20, Department of Anthropology B.P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Soehren,L. 1964 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Mahukona-Kawaihae Highway, Kohala, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Tomonari-Tuggle,M. 1988 North Kohala: Perception of a Changing Community. A Cultural Resource Management Study. Prepared for Division of State Parks, Outdoor Recreation,and Historic Sites,Department of Land and Natural Resources,State of Hawaii. Varigny,C. 1981 Fourteen Years in the Sandwich Islands, 1855-1868. Translated by Alfons Korn, University of Hawaii and Hawaii Historical Society,Honolulu. Williams,J. 1919 A Little Known Engineering Work in Hawaii.IN-Thrum's Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1919. Thos.G.Thrum,Honolulu. Wolfe,E.,and J.Morris 1996 Geological Map of the Island of Hawaii.U.S.Department of the Interior,U.S.Geological Survey. Wulzen,W.,J.Head,and S.Goodfellow 1995 Final Report: Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chalon International Mahukona Mauka Parcel; Lands of Kamano, Mahukona 1st and 2nd, Hihiu and Kaoma, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-7-02:por.36). PHRI Report 1520-080895. Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii,Inc. F11 La CIA for TNIK:(3)5-9-01:008,KahuMi'ili'i,North Kohala,Hawaii 39 F, F] [This page intentionally left blank] lJ CI C - 0 Ci c �f i i� z I ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT I Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision U APPENDIX 4 i Archaeological Inventory Survey and Related Correspondence I } I I l [This page intentionally left blank] U �.J F! lj U E� ANNE CAS DAVID Y.IGE d N9 S CHAIRPERSON E GOVERNOR OF HAWAII '.( 1359 4wyt BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT o KEKOA KAI.IIHIWA FIRST DEPUTY JEFFREY T.PEARSON D£PUTYINRECTOR-WATER 1 m` k4 r dk AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERLANDS STATE OF HAWAII CONSERVATION ES COASTAL E FORCE CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT � eDEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES FORESTi YA WILDLIFE OWILDLIFE HISTORICPRESERVATION STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION 'AI'°°LA'vEISLAND RESERVE coMhRss,ox LAND r--� KAKUHEWA BUILDING STATE PARKS I 601 KAMOKILA BLVD,STE 555 KAPOLEI,HAWAII 96707 February 8,2016 Dr.Robert B.Rechtman Log No. 2015.02305 LJ 507A E.Lanikaula St. Doc.No. 1602KM15 Hilo,HI 96720 Archaeology Dear Dr.Rechtman, SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review— �, Supplemental Archaeological Inventory Survey of 37.8 acres Kahua 1"Ahupua`a,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii TMK:(3)5-9-001:008 Ell Thank you for the opportunity to review the revised draft report titled Supplemental Archaeological Inventory Survey of TAX. (3) 5-9-001:008,Kahua 1 st Ahupua`a,North Kohala District,Island of Hawai`i(Rechtman,January 2016).We received the initial draft on December 31,2014 for which SHPD requested revisions on January 19,2016 J (Log No.2014.05803,Doc.No. 1601KM18).We received the revised draft via email on January 20,2016(Log No. 2015.02305). This supplemental archaeological inventory survey (AIS) was prepared by ASM Affiliates, Inc. (ASM) at the request of Gregory R. Mooers of Mooers Enterprises LLC, on the behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC. The supplemental AIS project area totals 37.8 acres, comprising the entirety of TNM: (3) 5-9-001:008. The landowner proposes to develop a 9 lot subdivision for a single-residence gated community. The development would involve rezoning from Residential (RS) to Residential Agricultural (RA) to afford each lot 3 acres. The proposed project would involve construction of single-residence dwellings on each lot, two internal roadways, and public shoreline access and associated parking lot. Residential units would utilize existing water, electrical, and telecommunication l j lines. Review of our records indicate an archaeological inventory survey was conducted for the subject parcel and adjacent r Parcel 007. The AIS documented a total of 68 historic properties, including 55 previously identified and 13 newly identified sites. Eight sites were recommended for no further work while 17 sites were recommended for preservation in place, and 43 sites were recommended for archaeological data recovery. The AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) was accepted by the SHPD on June 8, 1998 (Log No. 21268, Doc. No. 9805PM21). Several mitigation documents including a burial treatment plan(Rosendahl,April 2000),a phased mitigation plan(Kubo and t Rosendahl 2001; Log No. 2003.1295, Doc. No. 0307PM22), site preservation plan (Rosendahl August 2000; Log No. 26597,Doc.No. 0011PM14), and archaeological data recovery report(O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999;Log No. 25962, Doc. No. 0008RC05) were prepared over the course of several years between 1999 and 2005. Additional information for sites was also collected during additional inventory survey(Corbin 2003;Log No.2006.1566,Doc. No.0605JT43)and documentation of possible burial sites(PHRI 2005;Log No.2003.1290,Doc.No.0307PM20). The current Supplemental AIS (Rechtman 2016)was prepared in support of the previous AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) to provide the following: (1) Assessment of current site conditions; (2) Relocation of previously identified sites and identification and documentation of any newly located sites and features; and (3) Revised mitigation j recommendations. A total of 40 historic properties were documented; 39 previously identified sites were relocated and further documented, and a single, newly identified site was recorded (Site 29271). Pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-284-6, the Supplemental AIS evaluated all of the 40 sites as significant with 30 sites significant under Criterion "d" (information potential) only; 7 sites as significant under Criteria "d" and "e" L Mr.Rechtman February 8,2016 Page 2 (significance to particular group); 2 sites as significant under Criteria"c" (method of construction, craftsmanship) and "&' (information); and one site as significant under Criteria "c", "d", and "e". In addition to significance evaluations, the Supplemental AIS updated proposed site mitigation recommendations as follows: archaeological data recovery only for 16 sites;preservation only for 16 sites;data recovery and burial preservation for 2 sites;burial preservation only for 3 sites; and no further work for 3 sites(Table 1). The project effect determination is "Effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments." The SHPD concurs with the site significance assessments and recommended mitigation measures. Table 1.Overview 40 historic pra erties identified within project area Site TypelFnnchon --1 Significance kieii6ii Mip'9-aftion Mitig406n Comm k� � ations 2496 Habitation and burial and"e" Preservation Data recoveKy and burial preservation 2498 Habitation and "c","d",and Preservation Preservation ceremonial "Vl 2499 Habitation "c"and"d" Preservation Preservation 4000 Wall "d" No further work Preservation 4002 Rock mound "d" Preservation Data recovery 4003 Habitation "d" Preservation Data recovery 4004, Burial "d"and"e" Burial preservation Burial preservation_ 4005 Habitation "c"and"d" Preservation Preservation 4010 Animal enclosure "d7 No further work Data recovery 4011 Habitation "d" Preservation Preservation 4012 4'd" Preservation Data recovery 4013 Habitation and burial "d"and"e" Burial preservation Data recoveLryand burial preservation 4015 Habitation "d" Data recovery(completed) No further work 15261 Trail "d"and"e" No further work Preservation 16131 Habitation '4d" I Preservation Preservation 16132 Wall 4'd" No further work No further work 16133 Well/reservoir "d" Preservation Preservation 16134 Enclosure IV, Preservation Preservation 16135 Wall "d" Preservation Data recovery 16136 Habitation '6d" No further work No further work 16137 Rock mound '4d" Preservation Data recovery 16138 Platform and cairn "d" No further work Data recovery 16139 Habitation IIxI Preservation Preservation 16140 Habitation IV, Preservation Data recovery 16141 Habitation 11&" Preservation Data recovery L 16142 Habitation IV, Preservation Preservation 16143 Habitation IV, Preservation Data recovery 16144 Habitation '4d" Preservation Data recovery U IP6145 Habitation "d" Preservation Preservation 16146 Habitation 'gd" Preservation Data recovery I 1 1 6147 Habitation '4d" Preservation Preservation 11 1 8 11 6148 Habitation and burial "d"and e Burial preservation Burial preservation 1 6 149 Habitation "d" Preservation Preservation 16150 Habitation "il" Preservation Data recovery 16151 Habitation "d" Preservation Data recovery 16162 Burial "d"and."e" Burial preservation Burial preservation 16163 Habitation "d" Preservation Preservation D 16164 Habitation '4d" Preservation Data recovery 16167 Agricultural terrace "d" Preservation Data recovery --292-71 Trail I'd"and"e" I Not documented previously Preservation U "Mitigation underlined and in bold differs from previous recommendations U Mr.Rechtman February 8,2016 Z_ -` Page 3 The revisions address the issues and concerns raised in our earlier correspondence (January 19, 2016, Log No. j 2014.05 803,Doc.No. 1601KM18;January 20,2016,Robert Rechtman email correspondence).The report provides adequate discussion of the project, physical environment, cultural and historical background, previous archaeological studies, methods and field findings, and meets the requirements specified in HAR §13-276-5. It is accepted by SHPD. Please send one hardcopy of the document, clearly marked FINAL, along with a copy of this LJreview letter and a text-searchable PDF version on CD to the Kapolei SHPD office,attention SHPD Library. As stipulated in HAR §13-284-7(e),when the SHPD comments that the project determination is"Effect,with agreed upon mitigation commitments,"then detailed mitigation plans shall be developed for SHPD review and acceptance. The agreed-upon mitigation measures for the proposed development project are archaeological preservation, data recovery work,and burial preservation.As described above,a number of mitigation documents have been submitted based on the treatment recommendations of the previous archaeological investigations. However,pursuant to HAR §13-284-8, these mitigation documents need to be revised, as appropriate, to correlated with the revised recommendations provided by the current Supplemental AIS report (Rechtman January 2016). The SHPD looks forward to receiving for review and acceptance a revised data recovery plan that meets the requirements of HAR §13-278-3, a revised preservation plan that meets the requirements of HAR §13-277, and appropriate burial treatment plan(s)that meet the requirements of HAR §13-300-33. Please contact Kimi Matsushima at (808) 692-8027 or at Kimi.R.Matsushimakhawaii.gov if you have any questions or concerns regarding this letter. Aloha, Susan A.Lebo,PhD Archaeology Branch Chief 01 n, � f u Di V Ir?� s AS Imirm � Archaeology•History-Ethnography•Architectural History December 8, 2018 Sean Naleimaile Hawaii Island Archaeologist DLNR-SHPD 40 Pookela Street Hilo, HI 96720 Dear Sean: I am writing on behalf of my client, Kohala Shoreline, LLC, to request revisions to the accepted treatments of eleven archaeological sites that were described in a Supplemental AIS report for TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 in Kahua Ahupua`a,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. That report (� was accepted in 2016 (Log No. 2015.02305; Doc. No. 1602KM15). Since acceptance that �J development plans for the property changed from a 9-lot subdivision to a 6-lot subdivision,which has resulted,in the ability to preserve more of the archaeological landscape. As such the attached table contains the proposed revisions. In all cases we are requested a change from Data Recovery �J to Preservation. Once approved we will be poised to prepare the Data Recovery and Preservation Plans. Thank you for your consideration, U Robert B. Rechtman, Ph.D. Principal Archaeologist Attach/Table U Proposed Treatment Revisions SIHP No. Current Approved Treatment Proposed Revised Treatments 2496 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation Preservation/Burial Preservation 2498 Preservation 2499 Preservation 4000 Preservation 4002 Data Recovery 4003 Data Recovery 4004 Burial Preservation 4005 Preservation tJ 4010 Data Recovery Preservation 4011 Preservation 4012 Data Recovery Preservation LJ 4013 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 4015 No Further Work 15261 Preservation 16131 Preservation 16132 No Further Work 16133 Preservation 16134 Preservation 16135 Data Recovery 16136 No Further Work 16137 Data Recovery 16138 Data Recovery Preservation 16139 Preservation 16140 Data Recovery Preservation 16141 Data Recovery Preservation E 16142 Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery Preservation E16144 16145 Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation 16147 Preservation 16148 Burial Preservation 16149 Preservation 16150 Data Recovery 16151 Data Recovery Preservation 16162 Burial Preservation 16163 Preservation 16164 Data Recovery 16167 Data Recovery Preservation E 29271 Preservation L t__'- LJ F� All M40, fil Archaeology!History•Ethnography*Architectural History F1 December 8, 2018 Sean Naleimaile Hawaii Island Archaeologist DLNR-SHPD 40 Pookela Street Hilo,HI 96720 Dear Sean: i I am writing on behalf of my client, Kohala Shoreline, LLC, to request revisions to the accepted treatments of eleven archaeological sites that were described in a Supplemental AIS report for TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 in Kahua Ahupua`a,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. That report was accepted in 2016 (Log No. 2015.02305; Doc. No. 1602KM15). Since acceptance that development plans for the property changed from a 9-lot subdivision to a 6-lot subdivision,which has resulted in the ability to preserve more of the archaeological landscape. As such the attached table contains the proposed revisions. In all cases we are requested a change (from Data Recovery to Preservation. Once approved we will be poised to prepare the Data Recovery and Preservation Plans. �] Thank you for your consideration, �1 Robert B. Rechtman,Ph.D. Principal Archaeologist Attach/Table 7 f � Proposed Treatment Revisions r� SIHP No. Current Approved Treatment Proposed Revised Treatments 2496 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation Preservation/Burial Preservation 2498 Preservation 2499 Preservation } j 4000 Preservation 4002 Data Recovery 4003 Data Recovery 1-7 4004 Burial Preservation 4 4005 Preservation 4010 Data.Recovery Preservation 4011 Preservation r r 4012 Data Recovery Preservation LJ 4013 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 4015 No Further Work r , 15261 Preservation 16131 Preservation ` 16132 No Further Work 16133 Preservation (i 16134 Preservation �i 16135 Data Recovery 16136 No Further Work 16137 Data Recovery 16138 Data Recovery Preservation 16139 Preservation 16140 Data Recovery Preservation 16141 Data Recovery Preservation U 16142 Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation 16144 Data Recovery Preservation 16145 Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation 16147 Preservation 16148 Burial Preservation 16149 Preservation 16150 Data Recovery i 16151 Data Recovery Preservation . i 16162 Burial Preservation �} 16163 Preservation 16164 Data Recovery C-1 16167 Data Recovery Preservation 29271 Preservation i ii � i i - 1 I F-1 SUZANNE D.CASE OAYIDY.IGE * - +„41y DANCIIJUNA UR ON �(f' 4��+«k'I� tlOARUOF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES GOVERNOR OF HAWAU R „�B§9 w Tr COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ROBERT K.AtASUDA S FIRST DEPUTY M.KALEO M1tANVEL •�, DEPUTY DIRECTOR•W'A7ER �;• AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENr CONSERVATION ANDCOASTAL LANDS STATE OF HAWAII CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCFAIEAT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE �anrOf DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES HISTORIC PRESERYATION "IOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION STATE PARKS KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD,STE 555 KAPOLEI,HAWAII 96707 June 3,2019 j y IN REPLY REFER T4: Michael Yee,Planning Director Log No. 2019.00071 County of Hawaii—Planning Department Doc.No. 1905SN50 101,Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Archaeology Hilo,Hawaii 96720 planning@hawaiicounty.gov Dear Mr Yee, D SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review— > Request for Revisions to Agreed-Upon Mitigation Commitments for the Kohala Shoreline Project i KahuA Ahupua`a,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii TMK:(3)5-9-001:008 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) comments on a request to revise agreed- upon mitigation measures. SHPD received this request on January 9, 2019. ASM Affiliates, on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC,requests that based on recent changes to development plans for the proposed subdivision, from a 9- lot subdivision to a 6-lot subdivision,that the agreed-upon mitigation measures be revised to allow some of the sites slated for data recovery to be placed in preservation. In a letter dated February 8, 2016 (Log No. 2015.02305, Doc, No. I602KM15), a supplemental archaeological inventory survey(AIS)was accepted for the project area which totals 37.8 acres,comprising the entirety of TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008. The landowner proposed development of a 9-lot subdivision for a single-residence gated community. The development would involve rezoning from Residential(RS)to Residential Agricultural(RA). The proposed project would involve construction of single-residence dwellings on each lot, two internal roadways, and public shoreline access and associated parking lot. Residential units would utilize existing water, electrical, and telecommunication lines. _ The Supplemental AIS(Rechtman 2016)was prepared in support of the previous AIS(Graves and Franklin 1998)to provide the following: (1) assessment of current site conditions; (2) relocation of previously identified sites and identification and documentation of any newly identified sites and features; and (3) revised mitigation recommendations. A total of 40 historic properties were documented; 39 previously identified sites were relocated and further documented,and a single,newly-identified site was recorded(Site 50-10-05-29271). Pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-284-6, the Supplemental AIS evaluated all of the 40 sites as significant with 30 sites significant under Criterion "d"(information potential) only; 7 sites as significant under Criteria "d" and "e" l (significance to particular group); 2 sites as significant under Criteria"c" (method of construction, craftsmanship) and "d" (information); and one site as significant under Criteria"c", "d", and "e". In addition to the significance evaluations, the Supplemental AIS updated proposed site mitigation recommendations as follows: archaeological data recovery for 16 sites; preservation for 16 sites; data recovery and burial preservation for 2 sites; burial preservation for 3 sites;and no further work for 3 sites. The project effect determination for the proposed subdivision is "Effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments."The SHPD concurred with the site significance assessments and the mitigation commitments. u I Mr.Yee June 3,2019 Page 2 The current submittal indicates that with the current changes to the proposed subdivision plan,proposed changes to -- the the agree-upon mitigation commitments are as follows: Proposed Revision of Mitigation Commitments Site No. Current Mitigation Proposed Revised 50-10-05- Commitment Mitigation Commitment LJ 2496 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation Preservation/Burial Preservation 2498 Preservation 2499 Preservation 4000 Preservation 4002 Data Recovery 4003 Data Recovery 4004 Burial Preservation 4005 Preservation 4010 Data Recovery Preservation 4011 Preservation 4012 Data Recovery Preservation 4013 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 4015 No Further Work 11211 Preservation C} 16131 Preservation 16132 No Further Work 16133 Preservation 16134 Preservation 16135 Data Recovery 16136 No Further Work 16137 Data Recovery U161316138 Data Recovery Preservation 9 Preservation , 16140 Data Recovery Preservation 16141 Data Recovery Preservation 16142 Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation 16144 Data Recovery Preservation 16145 Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation 16147 Preservation 16148 Burial Preservation 16149 Preservation LJ 16150 Data Recovery 16151 Data Recovery Preservation 16162 Burial Preservation L 16163 Preservation 16164 Data Recovery 16167 Data Recovery Preservation 50-10-04/05-29271 Preservation The SHPD agrees to revision of the mitigation commitment from data recovery to preservation for Sites 2496, 4010,4012, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146, 16151,and 16167. As stipulated in HAR §13-284-7, when SHPD comments that a project will result in "Effect with agreed upon mitigation commitments,"then detailed mitigation plans shall be developed for SHPD review and acceptance prior to project work commencing. Mr.Yee June 3,2019 Page 2 The SHPD looks forward to receiving for review and acceptance a revised data recovery plan that meets the requirements of HAR§13-278-3,a preservation plan meeting the requirements of HAR§13-277 and an appropriate Fi burial treatment plan that meets the requirements of HAR §13-300.33 incorporating the revised changes, prior to work commencing. Please contact Sean N51eimaile at (808) 933-7653 or at Sean.P.NaleimailePhawaii.RQY for questions regarding P archaeological resources or this letter. Aloha, '4141,00,41#&- Alan S. Downer,PhD Administrator,State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc, Dr.Robert Rechtman,brechtman(c-6asmaffiliates.com Li L r- r-� I + r-rt [This page intentionally left blank] r7; U, i E r-i I r_ i i Supplemental Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK, (3) 5-9-001-0008 Kahna 1st Ahupua a North Kohala District Island of Hawai i FINAL,VERSION Prepared B Al r � ` ✓ A gad i r'P Robert B. Rechtman,Ph.D. Prepared For: Kohala Shoreline, LLC r r c/o: Mooers Enterprises P.O. Box 1101 Kamuela,HI 96743 r� November 1'Vovember 2014 ;p (Revised January 2016) As �w A<},,-A,,'gy-l 1ku-,a l;ehn�,yx:rphv 1..hi¢,cnr d l(asmrc 01119'7 ASM Project Number 22500.00 l_ Supplemental Archaeological Invento� Survey Update of TMK: (3) 5-9-001 :008 Kahua Pt Ahupua`a North Kohala District Island of Hawaii J J �9 A M Executive Summary EXECUTIVE SUMMARY At the request of Gregory R.Mooers of Mooers Enterprises LLC,on behalf of his client Kohala Shoreline,LLC,ASM Affiliates,Inc.(ASM)has conducted this supplemental archaeological inventory survey(AIS)updating and expanding on an earlier DLNR-SBPD accepted AIS of an approximately 37.8 acre project area in Kahud 11t Ahupua'a,North Kohala District Island of Hawaii (TMK: 3-5-9-001:008). The earlier archaeological inventory survey report contained site treatments based on the then planned subdivision development of the parcel.Subsequent archaeological work on the property included the preparation of a data recovery plan for one site (Rosendahl 1994) and the data recovery of that site (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999), additional burial testing at three sites (PHRI 2005) and the preparation of a burial treatment plan(PHRI 2000a),along with the preparation of an archaeological sites preservation plan (PHRI 2000b). These follow-up studies were conducted with the understanding that the development of the subject parcel would be limited to one single-family residence occupying the extreme western end of the parcel,-and that the remaining bulk of the parcel would be left in its natural state. Thus the site treatment recommendations accepted in the earlier AIS report were reconsidered and revised such that the treatment of all of the sites previously approved for data recovery was changed to preservation.The current proposed development plan for the parcel is no longer restricted to the construction of one single-family residence, but rather includes the creation of a nine lot subdivision.This new proposed land use necessitates revising the site treatments once again,bringing them into greater conformance with what was accepted in the original AIS. The purpose of the current supplemental AIS is to assess current site conditions and identify any previously unrecorded sites and features, and to provide new site treatment recommendations appropriate for the newly proposed nine lot subdivision development plan as well as to provide a map showing accurate site locations. To that end,ASM completed a supplemental AIS of the study area,identified and replotted the previously recorded sites,and documented additional features that had not been previously recorded. The supplemental AIS of the current project area was conducted on December 1-3, 2009 by J. David Nelson, B.A.,Christopher S.Hand,B.A.,Johnny R.,Dudoit,B.A.,and Ashton K.Dircks Ali Sam,B.A.under the direction of Robert B.Rechtman,Ph.D.Additional survey and subsurface testing at selected features was conducted on February 23 and 24,2010 by Robert B.Rechtman,Ph.D.,Matthew R. Clark,B.A.,and by J.David Nelson,B.A.A search for remnants of the trails shown on the various Historic maps reviewed for this study was -undertaken by Robert B. Rechtman, Ph.D., and Matthew R. Clark, B.A. on August 22, 2013 and on July 16, 2014. During the intensive pedestrian survey of the study area,the entire parcel was subject to north/south transects with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals. All thirty-nine of the previously recorded sites were identified, and while the earlier plotting of site locations was not wholly accurate,in all but six cases,the site descriptions were adequate.Additionally,a portion of a previously unrecognized site—Site 29271,the ala loa coastal trail/Jeep road,commonly labeled the"Mahukona- Kawaihae Trail"on maps produced prior to 1931—was recorded across the project area.Of these seven site omissions in the previous inventory survey(Graves and Franklin 1998), four were deemed sufficiently significant to warrant further inventory survey investigation (Site 2496 Feature D, Site 4013 newly identified rock shelter, Site 15261 additional trail branches, and the Site 29271 Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail section); the other three omissions are relatively minor and can be adequately addressed during subsequent data recovery and preservation work.The current fieldwork revealed the presence of a burial at Site 2496 Feature D and an additional habitation feature at Site 4013 (Feature D). Given the current development proposal (a nine lot subdivision) for the study property(see Figures 8 and 10), site treatments are reconsidered and the existing preservation and burial treatment plans require revision. Table 4 shows the prior approved treatments and the proposed treatment recommendations.As can be seen in this table,the proposed treatment for several of the sites reverts back to that as was approved in the earlier AIS. The revised treatments were based on a very limited land use(one single-family residence)of the 37.8 acre parcel,and the current proposed treatments take into consideration the current proposed development plan.No further work continues to be the proposed treatment for two sites (Sites 16132 and 16136);both of these were substantially documented during either the original AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998)or the subsequent burial testing(PHRI 2005).Data recovery has already been completed for Site 4015 (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999),thus no farther work is recommended for this site.Two of the sites(Sites 4010 and 1613 8)that were earlier approved for no further work are now recommended for data recovery prior to their destruction; and one site (Site 4000) that was approved for no further work is now recommended for preservation as it appears to be a part of the Site 4004 burial complex. The four previously identified burial sites(Sites 4004,4013, 16148,and 16162)shall continue to be preserved, however the burial treatment plan(PH U 2000a)should be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use and the newly identified burial site(Site 2496 Feature D)added to the plan.As stated in the burial treatment plan: AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii [J Executive Summary While it is the intent of the owner to develop only the western portion of the project area, and to leave the larger eastern portion in its present undeveloped condition, it is recognized that the possibility of changes in intended property use by the current or any subsequent owner may arise in the future.Therefore,any proposed future changes in land use for the eastern portion of the property will require the owner to return to the HIBC for possible reconsideration of the adequacy of the 1�M+ long-term preservation measures for the burial sites as proposed in this BTP.(PM 2000a:15) -' Data recovery is now recommended for sixteen sites (4002, 4003, 4010, 4012, 16135, 16137, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146,16150,16151, 16164, 16167)plus portions of two additional sites(Sites 2496 and 4013) that also contain preserved burial features.All of these sites were accepted for data recovery in the prior AIS(Graves and Franklin 1998)with the exception of Sites 4010 and 1613 8,which were accepted for no further work.It is believed that these two sites stili retain information that could be recovered and aid in developing a specific chronology of the project area land use history.Pursuant to HAR 13§13-278,a plan addressing the data recovery of these eighteen sites should be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SB PD for review and acceptance. Preservation is now recommended for sixteen sites(2498,2499,4000,4005,4011, 15261, 16131, 16133, 16134, 16139, 16142, 16145, 16147, 16149, 16163 and 29271)two of which(Sites 4000 and 15261)were approved for no further work as a result of the original AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) and another (Site 29271), which was not L) identified at that time.A new preservation plan that addresses these sixteen sites should be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and acceptance in compliance with HAR.13§13-277. Eii i f"i L U ii AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii Table of Contents CHAPTERS Page 1. INTRODUCTION.........................................................................................................1 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES .................................................................................................................4 3. ARCHAEOLOGICAL BACKGROUND ...................................................................8 4. CULTURE-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND..........................................................13 A GENERALIZED MODEL OF HAWAIIAN PREHISTORY.................... HISTORY AFTER CONTACT........................................................................................ 14 �_5 A GENERALIZED SETTLEMENT MODEL FOR KOHALA WAHO........................... 17 Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a 5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK.....................................................................27 SWSITE 2496 ...............................................................................................................29 FeatureD...................................................................................................................... 31 SIHP SITE 4013 ............................................................................................................... 34 FeatureD......................................................................................................................35 SIHP SITE 15261 .............................................................................................................38 FeatureB......................................................................................................................40 FeatureC......................................................................................................................42 SUPSITE 29271 .............................................................................................................42 FeatureA....................................................................................................... 44 Feature B j FeatureC......................................................................................................................49 6. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................................51 REFERENCES CITED...................................................................................................54 Lill" FIGURES Page Li 1.Project area location..................................................................................................................................2 2.Tax Map Ke 3-5-9-01 showing current study parcel(Parcel 008 ..............3 3.Keawewai Gulch drainage........................................................................................................................4 4. Typical vegetation cover across the study parcel......................................................................................5 5.Rocky shoreline along the study parcel....................................................................................................5 I" 6. Typical rocky beach area..........................................................................................................................6 7.Waiakailio Bay..........................................................................................................................................6 8.Proposed development plan......................................................................................................................7 r- 9.Portion of Graves and Franklin(1998)map of the study area showing archaeological sites...................9j 10. Locations of previous archaeological investigations in the vicinity of the current study area. ............10 11. 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S. C.Wiltse showing the current project area.........................20 i a � I AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 1-11,North Kohala,Hawaii iii ) � Table of Contents U 12.Hm9ui'i Registered Map No. 223l hwA.B. Lohcustebzbzl9O]) showing the u00001 projectarea ..........................................................................................................................................2l 13' I9I3T '0'G.S'Knvaiboe�~~~^~e*c showing the project area' ''' ^ ' ' '' ' ' '' ''24 — l4.Portion o[the I93lLand Court Application map 1043 showing the current projectarsa ..................25 15- 1950LlS.G.S.Kanpoiboo quadrangle showing the current projectureu ..............................................26 F 10. site locations ond- unrecorded 6euh�em(0� I] (Site Site ]0 oI�28l LJ and C; Sdo2927l ]3)...--.. .-.,.....'.._-..--.—.-- .................................................................288 l7. Graves and Irmildiu(l99X)map ofSite 2496page lnfl..................................................................29 l8, Graves and lruoldbu(l99R)map ofSite 249Mpage 2of 2...................................................................3U LJ 19. SIEP Site 2496Feature Z,view tothe northwest ...............................................................................3l ` 2O. SI0OPSite 249hschematic plan view....................................................................................................32 21. 8IEOP Site 2440Feuhre D.plan view....................................................................................................33 22, SIHP Site 2496 Feature DTlJ-Iwest wall profile,..............................................................................S3 23. SX0P Site 4Ol3schematic plan view....................................................................................................34 24. SI0OPSite 4Ol3Feature Dview tothe southeast .--.---.._---..--.._........_.--._-..-35 ( � 25. 8IIIP Site 4Ol3Feature Dplan view and nuzfiIe..................................................................................30 26, SIB? Site 40I9Feature DT[7-land overhang western profile............................................................37 27.Trail shown ouHistoric maps bzKahuzdli^ili^i ^u-..................................................39 FJ�`, 28. 8lIIP Sbul526lFmo1ozel�,vicr�tu1h#nodheamt...---.—,..~_...—,....---....—....___.4O 29, SIEP Site l52hIFeature|3, view 10the north......................................................................................4I 30iSIHP Site l52MlFeature]0,view tothe south......................................................................................4l i { 31. SIHP Site 752MIFeature]0,view bothe southwest .............................................................................42 32, 0DHP Site I520lFeature C�view 10the northeast................................................................................43 33. SIBPSite l5261 Feature C,view tnthe southwest..............................................................................43 34` 0O]P Site l52hlFeature C,view tnthe southwest ..--..—.----.---.---.—..---.----..44 U 35.Aerial view(from Google Earth)showing the locations of SIHPSite 2927IFeatures&D,and C....45 36. 8Il[P Site 29Z7lFeature A,view tothe northwest. .............................................................................46 37. SI0P Site 2927lFeature Aview tnthe south......................................................................................40 i ( 30, Trianglehn8y anthropomorphic petroglyph etched on exfoliating vertical surface along the route ufSite 29271 Feature AbmKeawenmiGulch........................................................................47 39.Outline detail ofSite 2O27lFeature A petroglyph......................................................................... .....47 > ( 40. 8IBP Site 2927lFeature]3,view 10the southeast................................................................................40 4l. SWSite 29271 Feature IBa1unnamed gulch,view 10the southwest.................................................4B 42. S0BP Site 29271 Feature Csouth of/nomkulnxdbz dirt road,view tothe north...................................49 43. 8IHPSite 2g27lFeature Cnorth ofrmom6xofnu6uidirt road,view tnthe southeast.............................5O TABLES PageU I. Sites within the current projectarea and their priorapIxuved treatments................................................0 [] 2. Items recovered from SIIB» Site 40l] Feature D TlJ-2........................................................................377 3. Summary of site significance—...--,--._-..-.._.-.._.._.....—.—.---..—...—,---.—.--.5ll 4. Previously approved and current proposed treatment recommendations..............................................533 >� `- iv AIS Update for IMK:05-9-0O :008,Qahud11,NombKohala,Huwai'i P_ 1. Introduction F] Ll 1, INTRODUCTION At the request of Gregory R.Mooers of Mooers Enterprises LLC,on behalf of his client Kohala Shoreline,LLC,ASM Affiliates,Inc.(ASM)has conducted this supplemental archaeological inventory survey(AIS)updating and expanding on an earlier DLNR-SHPD accepted AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998)of an approximately 37.8 acre 'project area in Kabud 11 Ahupua'a,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii(TNlK: (3) 5-9-01:008;Figures I and 2). The earlier P archaeological inventory survey report contained site treatments based on the then planned subdivision development. of the parcel. Subsequent archaeological work for the property included the preparation of a data recovery plan for one site(Rosendahl 1994)and the data recovery of that site(O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999),additional burial testing at three sites(PRE 2005)and the preparation of a burial treatment plan(PHRI 2000a),along with the preparation of D an archaeological sites preservation plan (PHRI 2000b). These follow-up studies were conducted with the understanding that the development of the subject parcel would be limited to one single-family residence occupying the extreme western end of the parcel,and that the remaining bulk of the parcel would be left in its natural state.Thus the site treatments accepted in the earlier AIS report(Graves and Franklin 1998)were reconsidered and revised such that the treatment of all of the sites previously approved for data recovery was changed to preservation. The current proposed development plan for the parcel is no longer restricted to the construction of one single- family residence,but rather includes the creation of a nine lot subdivision. This new proposed land use necessitates revising the site treatments once again,bringing them into greater conformance with what was approved in the original AIS. The purpose of the current supplemental AIS is to assess current site conditions and identify any previously unrecorded sites and features,and to provide new site treatment recommendations appropriate for the newly proposed nine lot subdivision development plan,as well as to provide a map showing accurate site locations.To that end,ASM completed a supplemental AIS of the study area, identified and re-plotted the previously recorded sites, and documented additional features that had not been previously recorded. The current report documents the findings of the resurvey of the study area and has been prepared as a companion L document to a cultural impact assessment (Rechtman 2014), fulfilling the requirements of the County of Hawaii Planning Department and the Department of Land and Natural Resources(DLNR)with respect to permit approvals for land-altering and development activities. U This report begins with a description of the general project area and the proposed development activities.This is followed by a presentation of the archaeological background for the specific study area,as well as a discussion of the culture-historical background for Kahud Ahupua'a and the North Kohala region. This comprehensive background L information facilitates a more complete understanding of the significance of the resources that exist within the study area.A description of the current conditions of the previously recorded archaeological sites is then presented,followed by a re-evaluation of site significance assessments and proposed new treatment recommendations. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 1 I. Introduction 200300m,E 200900m,E, 2n} 202100m • 041OOrnE•rernI3� t .^ ,Wn L„ r c a t yl I r~'Y !��• y` ..Y. �R 4., I 4" .,,�, `l ,.� �� r � f �w..p f O 6r ro 4 f .. ( C\ r� , ° � lett f � a �� 9 c e a a * FI Iq a tg " 1 WT S. It ti d I f F n 7T CIAJL / } K ' ` "•mw^»a �o pk` f lTkldkil Project are z P° f 1 P W�-N 4�' ✓� / r ,y,� PROJECT AREA n E w r, r " 1 %4 IQ Island of llava^ai'i 200300 E. 2fJ090OmE, 2rnJ50Orr,E• 202100mE^ 202700rr,E, 20:3300r"E. 20400Orr,E, TN 1,111p 1 WILE 0 A HI 0 � BW 1db;YJ METERS Portion oft SGS 3 mm �-enc, IVquadrngl tw NNaihrc.III 1991 Map created with TOPUG @2002 Natiratal Geogaphac twwv.raffia: o�aapluc.rosrW tcpo) -- Figure 1.Project area location. 2 AIS Update for TNM:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 1St,North Kohala,Hawaii 1. Introduction w z Y n m vA V�-.� II „i r ff 1� tip: Y Ilk y Y y W a , t J( r � P" t W s. Study p<amce M C y �peJb 4, .5 Figure 2.Tax Map Key 3-5-9-01 showing current study parcel(Parcel 008). AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 3 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities 2. PROJECT AREA DESCRIPTION AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES The project area occupies 37.8 acres along the North Kohala coast,bounded by the ocean to the west and Akoni-Pule Highway (Hwy 270) to the east (see Figure 2). The project area is bounded to the north by an undeveloped state- owned parcel and to the south by the recently developed Kohala Kai subdivision(see Figure 2).Elevation within the project area ranges from sea level to about 160 feet above sea level and the surface geology consists of basaltic lava flows from Kohala volcano dating from at least 120,000 years ago (Wolfe and Morris 1996). Soil within the study area is classified as Kawaihae very rocky very fine sandy loam.The sloping terrain is dissected in a few locations by steeply incised drainage channels (Figure 3) and the vegetation is almost exclusively low grasses and kiawe(Figure 4).The typical shoreline in this area is rocky(Figure 5)with a few small coral,rock,and sand beach areas(Figure 6). Waiakailio Hay(Figure 7), at the northern end of the property, is the least rocky and most sheltered area along this portion of the coast,and it offers the easiest ocean access. The proposed development plans (Figure 8) include the establishment of a nine-lot gated subdivision. The property is currently zoned for single-family residential with minimum lots of 15,000 square feet (RS-15). Upon reviewing the project site and development options, the property owner determined that a less dense development would be more appropriate, and is proposing a change of zone to Residential Agricultural 3-acres (RA-3a), which would decrease potential density and lessen impacts to archaeological resources. Road access would be from two locations along Akoni-Pule Highway. The project would be provided with water, electrical, and telephone service from existing lines located within a utility easement above Akoni Pule Highway. The house sites would be located a minimum of 150 feet below the highway and covenants,conditions and restrictions(CC&Rs)would limit homes to a single story and require color schemes that minimize visual impacts. Landscaping would be installed along the subdivision's two internal roadways and also on the residential lots, subject to CC&Rs. The project includes public shoreline access and associated parking and will preserve a coastal buffer through the establishment of a 100-foot no development shoreline setback for all but Lot 1,which would be subject to the normal 40 foot setback. �_ pp P i r r t dy e4 man erti„« yyy l lir v � � , P RA ip rt�, Figure 3.Keawewai Gulch drainage. 4 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 15i,North Kohala,Hawaii 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities � ori/ �r ;,r '/% „.. r r/'. r �..� % r.. ✓ ,y r„ i /�r :j/ r �%/obi/�1�%/����;'. .,l; r /� r,r. r/rfy it r //r ".//i� /%.,/,,!//'.,�r'•�i rr-,;r,.///(ryJ/i/i y..� � <.,; (� ,Iri rlr% �., I /�//I r�./r F ;!y //r ��U J�r f/ / %lf�� �,�./% "�/l../r,/`✓,;r''�(�y.���� ,�/�i ����1%r/r�/1/5���r/� /��lr ✓� r(i ,'f��.,., / rl�, tic/�/r'f//0�//:cl„!%r1��,l,,s����01,//i�1;9! � , !r �, � ' (0 r i t�"9�� y if r rµ it � ,r✓°�! Figure 4.Typical vegetation cover across the study parcel. / r r w i � v I y+y� Figure 5.Rocky shoreline along the study parcel. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 5 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities �m , A � ry ,� m ry s. ry 4 N; .y w II _ y s ti Figure 6.Typical rocky beach area. �— Hary H si � �^, ,�^vt� ,rot/� ✓�l N a✓: Y/ o, w i Figure 7.Waiakailio Bay. 6 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua I",North Kohala,Hawaii 2. Project Area Description and Proposed Development Activities �w ma _, y w u� 1 , 3 � U jr 1 i ph I� 1 Ir o� z G z C � � E � �r(�,r u ✓ ,� J x j 1111 ,", ri `°,ii'i (� ✓ ,✓ 1 s -:T w O 2 _ W7� k N x �o d O 0 2 Q Q06 0 z bA AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 7 3. Archaeological Background ® ARCHAEOLOGICAL In 1964 Soehren surveyed the construction corridor for the Kawaihae to Mahukona Highway, which terminated roughly nine miles(14.5 kilometers)to the north of the project area.During this survey Soehren(1964)recorded two small rock cairns, a rock platform, and two open-ended enclosures with associated marine shell and coral within the ahupua`a of Kahua 1 and 2.In 1968 Bonk surveyed the coastal area from Kawaihae to Kaiholena ahupua`a.During this survey Bonk(1968)recorded 24 stone features within Kahua 1. The concentration of Bonk's features that were recorded on the northern side of the current project area was later designated in the State Inventory of historic Places - (SIHP)as SIHP Site 4156 during the 1972 Statewide Inventory as the Waiakailio Bay Complex.Starting in 1983 Paul H.Rosendahl,Ph.D.,Inc(PHRI)began a series of archaeological studies that focused on the current project area and adjoining lands to the south(Allen 1985a, 1985b;Corbin 2004;Graves and Franklin 1998;Kubo and Rosendahl 2003; ®'Hare and Goodfellow 1999;PHRI 2000x, 2000b, 2005). The resultant reports include reconnaissance surveys, an inventory survey,mitigation(preservation and data recovery)plans,data recovery reports,and burial treatment plans. The AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) contains a map that shows the locations of the archaeological sites that were recorded within the current project area(Figure 9),and Table 1 lists the sites and their prior approved treatments. Table 11. Sites within the currea and their ed treatments SIHP No. Treatment in Inventory* Revised Treatment in Preservation Plans** 2496 Data Recovery Preservation j2498 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation 2499 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation 4000 No Further Work No Further Work 4002 Data Recovery Preservation 4003 Data Recovery Preservation 4004 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation 4005 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation 4010 No Further Work No Further Work 4011 Data Recovery Preservation 4012 Data Recovery Preservation 4013 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation 4015 Data Recovery Completed Data Recovery Completed 15261 No Further Work No Further Work 16131 Data Recovery Preservation 16132 No Further Work No Further Work 16133 Data Recovery Preservation 16134 Data Recovery Preservation -- 16135 Data Recovery Preservation 16136 Further Data Collection No Further Work 16137 Data Recovery Preservation 16138 No Further Work No Further Work - 16139 Data Recovery Preservation 16140 Data Recovery Preservation 16141 Data Recovery Preservation 16142 Data Recovery Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation 16144 Data Recovery Preservation 16145 Data Recovery Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation 16147 Data Recovery Preservation 16148 Further Data Collection Burial Preservation 16149 Data Recovery Preservation 16150 Data Recovery Preservation 16151 Data Recovery Preservation 16162 Further Data Collection Burial Preservation 16163 Data Recovery Preservation 16164 Data Recovery Preservation 16167 Data Recovery Preservation *Derived from Graves and Franklin(1998);**PHRI(2000b);PERU(2005). 8 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahua 1St,North Kohala,Hawaii 3. Archaeological Background y a» C) 0, e� 0 f 016 e 01 19 i LO Pr t C4 0 � av � tea, � 0 a 0 0 a W 4Gd P� ul t iCL cy iid@ndd `0 ami ` d Ln e� f 00 " 0 � o w AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 9 3. Archaeological Background Within the western portion of the current study parcel,data recovery investigations at SI RP Site 4015(Figure 10) focused on four enclosure features(O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999). Fishing gear and grinding tools were recovered, as well as radiocarbon assays of charcoal from each of the four features.Based on the food remains,architecture,and radiocarbon results, Site 4015 could have been a habitation site associated with the collection of near-shore and offshore marine resources,possibly dating back to A.D. 1370.Judging from the presence of sub-wall deposits,an even earlier occupation could have been present at Site 4015. Soehren (1964) Current study area i. lilt Allen (1985a and 1985b), Graves and Franklin (1998) DIM 0"Hare and Goodfellow (1999) Corbin (2004); Loubser and Rechfirian (2007) Corbin 2000 A ww i ...... tive It N, ifi V". iwm�„w«�... ��wmuw,mmuwmonrrw� �.��m�wi� rm*mw+'a ,mw�wmm ww,w�urv,'.', ,g`.,.,�. amw�mmn+u+a++M4 �eaefy i, '(i t "Y" �e IN"ti It g '0 30 Kin Figure 10.Locations of previous archaeological investigations in the vicinity of the current study area. 10 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahud 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 3. Archaeological Background Additional recent archaeological work near the project area includes an extensive data recovery investigation along the coastal portions of Kahud 2 and Waikd ahupua'a (Loubser and Rechtman 2007), and a data recovery investigation of Site 16170 in coastal Waikd(Corbin 2000;see Figure 10).The Loubser and Rechtman(2007)study was conducted at seven sites (SIRP Sites 2492, 16177, 16122, 2494, 16129, 2485, and 16154) within the state designated site complex (SW Site 4157) known as the Kahud 2 Complex. This study recovered a wealth of information pertaining to resource collection,settlement distribution,feature function,and site chronology.The oldest radiocarbon date (A.D. 1270-1420) from the site complex came from a sub-wall context and is roughly contemporaneous with the early date from the nearby Waiakailio Bay Complex (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999). Loubser and Rechtman(2007)also documented the temporal development of the Kahud 2 village area showing where it may have started,how it subsequently expanded,and finally contracted; and demonstrated that the habitation area most likely constituted a nucleated settlement of several households with co residential domestic groups. Discrete households were identified using a kauhale settlement model, and male and female activity areas were identified within each kauhale. The Corbin(2000)study focused on a modified outcrop and a platform. The modified outcrop yielded volcanic glass flakes and gastropods,whereas the platform yielded volcanic glass flakes,sea urchin spine abraders,and a hearth. The hearth feature,exposed at the bottom of the platform,yielded three charcoal samples radiocarbon dated to between A.D. 1435 and 1635. The upper layers within the platform dated to after A.D. 1665. Based on the results, Corbin suggested that the platform at Site 16170 represented a temporary habitation site that was occupied to procure gastropods and possibly to manufacture urchin spine abraders. A settlement model for leeward coastal North Kohala can be derived from the previous archaeological work referenced above. Settlement complexes are more-or-less evenly spaced along the leeward coastline of North Kohala, with a subsistence focus on marine resources,although the ostensible absence of perishable products from cultivation has most likely skewed the archaeological record. Site complexes seem to concentrate around small bays and cobble beaches where canoes could land along the otherwise cliff-lined coast.A focal point of most settlement complexes is Li a halau,or canoe shed,located above and behind the beach that affords the best opportunity for launching or landing. A canoe shed is typically long,narrow, and open on the makai side. Inland and on either side of the canoe shed are habitation and storage sites of various kinds.Tomonari-Tuggle(1988)notes that within site complexes it is possible to distinguish concentrations of habitation structures and associated features that could represent the areas once occupied by family units. Each family unit contained one or more living structure, an animal pen or two, outdoor working areas, and burial mounds. Typical features within a habitation area, or kauhale, include the following: structures with massive walls that resemble long"cupboards,"multiple unit longhouses with an opening on one end, houses with enclosing platforms,house complexes enclosed by walls,rectangular houses with open ends,a variety of C-and U-shaped structures,and burial mounds and small platforms on the periphery.According to available evidence there are few known hetau on the leeward North Kohala coast; only three paved structures with large rock fill at Kukaipahu fit the descriptions(Smith et al. 1973).Additional work and closer scrutiny of stone platforms on crests of rises, that are sometimes associated with walled precincts, could reveal more heidu along the coastal settlements, however(e.g.,Soehren 1969). The narrow band of habitation settlements along the coast are separated from a broader upland band of agricultural U walls and habitations by a barren zone with relatively few archaeological sites.Within individual ahupuaa,trails that pass through the barren zone would have connected coastal settlements with upland fields (Apple 1965).The width of the barren zone is inversely related to the abundance of rainfall; in the wetter north near 'Upolu Point it is one kilometer wide and widens to five kilometers at Kahud in the drier south.Surveys that have covered the uplands away Li from the coastline date back to the late 1960s when the University of Hawaii field schools mapped Lapakahi ahupuaa north of Kailiclena ahupuaa,using aerial photographs and surveying instruments(Newman 1970).Vast portions of Kahud 1 and 2 inland of the highway were surveyed by Hammatt and Borthwick(1986, 1987, 1990). During these U upland surveys,that covered land up to the 3,000-foot contour above sea level, archaeologists found trail markers, scattered agricultural terraces,temporary habitation shelters,and rock walls.The remains most probably relate to the upland agricultural fields mentioned in various oral and written histories. On the basis of surveys and excavations, Rosendahl.(1994)has identified the following sites in the better watered Lapakahi area:residential structures with C- Li shapes or rectangular plan forms, piled stone walls or earthen embankments demarcating agricultural fields, trails, possible burial piles,water cisterns,rock shelters,and petroglyphs. Bearing in mind that the inhabited lowland zone along the coast and the inhabited upland zone of the interior were L! most likely occupied by the same people at different parts of the year,detection of increased and expanded use of any one of the zones should be suggestive of overall increased population size(of course,if none of the zones show signs of decline or abandonment).Based on 54 radiocarbon assays and evidence for increasing subdivision of stone-walled AIS Update for TNM:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 11 i' 3. Archaeological Background i field parcels in the Lapakahi uplands north of the project area,Rosendahl(1994)has suggested that the Kohala upland fields began around A.D. 1400 in the form of shifting cultivation, which intensified to a crop-rotation system with clearly delineated boundaries by A.D. 1600. Based on evidence from the entire Hawaiian Archipelago, Kirch (1985:216-217) has proposed that agricultural development and population growth occurred as three generalized phases:adjustment,expansion,and intensification.When Polynesian colonizers first landed they had to adjust to the unique demands of the less tropical Hawaiian environment. Once this adjustment along the littoral zone had been Ell made, settled populations were able to increasingly utilize upland areas. Greater labor inputs to increase yields eventually meant that even the uplands needed to be terraced and sub-divided for crop rotation.By the time Europeans documented Hawaiian agriculture from the late eighteenth century onwards,the system was a fully fledged intensive Ut one, with populations utilizing even seemingly marginal zones. The practice of mulching and the surprisingly rapid construction of irrigation systems enabled Hawaiian communities to cultivate seemingly marginal hinterlands(Kirch 1985:236).For example,Kamehameha I was able to feed his substantial entourage and standing army at Kawaihae by constructing irrigated fields in the Waimea uplands over a five-year period. To summarize the archaeologically derived settlement patterns of the Kohala area,the first significant occupation of the area seems to occur around A.D. 1300 near the coast.Based on available evidence, the population appears to —� have been small'and engaged primarily in fishing and some cultivation of crops. Over the next two centuries the 1 uplands too were increasingly cultivated. This period experienced more regular seasonal transhumance between the coast in summer and uplands in winter.Around A.D. 1500 ahupua`a were clearly delineated and bound fields in the uplands also became more marked.By A.D. 1700 more-or-less permanent settlements occurred along the coast and in the uplands. The ahupua`a system of social organization was firmly established at this time,with defined land units extending from the ocean into the mountains.Local chiefs controlled the ahupua`a and these were in turn integrated at the district level.Paramount chiefs ruled over the district within a feudal-like system of taxation and redistribution. Class distinction between ruling ali`i,or chiefs, and makes`dinana,or commoners, characterized the overall political i economy and ideology prior to the Mdhele in 1848. Ell, II LJ L i I ' Li r- I' i 12 AIS Update for T K:(3)5-9-001:008,Kahud 111,North Kohala,Hawaii i� U 4. Culture-Historical Background 4. CULTURE-HISTORICAL BACKGROUND A GENERALIZED MODEL OF HAWAIIAN PREHISTORY The generalized cultural sequence that follows is based on Kirch's (1985) model, and amended to include recent revisions offered by Kirch(2011).The conventional wisdom has been that first inhabitants of Hawaii Island probably arrived by at least A.D. 300, and focused habitation and subsistence activity on the windward side of the island (Burtchard 1995; Kirch 1985; Hommon 1986). However, there is no archaeological evidence for occupation of Hawaii Island (or perhaps anywhere in Hawaii) during this initial settlement, or colonization stage of island occupation(A.D. 300 to 600).More recently, Kirch(2011)has convincingly argued that Polynesians may not have arrived to the Hawaiian Islands until at least A.D. 1000,but expanded rapidly thereafter. The implications of this on the currently accepted chronology would alter the timing of the Settlement,Developmental,and Expansion Periods, possibly shifting the Settlement Period to A.D. 1000 to 1100,the Developmental Period to A.D. 1100 to 1350,and the Expansion Period to A.D. 1350 to 1650. The initial settlement in Hawaii is believed to have occurred from the southern Marquesas Islands. This was a period of great exploitation and environmental modification,when early Hawaiian farmers developed new subsistence strategies by adapting their familiar patterns and traditional tools to their new environment(Kirch 1985;Pogue 1978). Their ancient and ingrained philosophy of life tied them to their environment and kept order.Order was further assured by the conical clan principle of genealogical seniority(Kirch 1984).According to Forriander(1969),the Hawaiians brought from their homeland certain universal Polynesian customs: the major gods Kane, Ku, and Lono; the kapu system of law and order; cities of refuge;,the 'aumakua concept;various epiphenomenal beliefs; and the concept of mana. The Development Period brought about a uniquely Hawaiian culture. The portable artifacts found in archaeological sites of this period reflect not only an evolution of the traditional tools,but some distinctly Hawaiian inventions.The adze(koi)evolved from the typical Polynesian variations of plano-convex,trapezoidal,and reverse- triangular cross-section to a very standard Hawaiian rectangular quadrangular tanged adze. A few areas in Hawaii produced quality basalt for adze production.Mauna Kea on the island of Hawaii was a well-known adze quarry.The two-piece fishhook and the octopus-lure breadloaf sinker are Hawaiian inventions of this period, as are 'ulu maika stones and lei Who palaoa.The later was a status item worn by those of high rank,indicating a trend toward greater status differentiation(Kirch 1985).Early dates from windward Kohala were reported by Cordy(2000);these sites are believed to have been utilized in the early 1200s. LJ The Expansion Period is characterized by the greatest social stratification, major socioeconomic changes, and intensive land modification.Most of the ecologically favorable zones of the windward and coastal regions of all major islands were settled and the more marginal leeward areas were being developed. The greatest population growth occurred during the Expansion Period. It was during the Expansion Period that a second major migration settled in Hawaii,this time from Tahiti in the Society Islands.According to Kamakau(1976)the kahuna Pa'ao settled in the islands during the 13'century.Pd'ao was the keeper of the god Kii'Wilimoku, who had fought bitterly with his older brother,the high priest Lonopele. After much tragedy on both sides,Pd'ao escaped Lonopele's wrath by fleeing in a canoe.Kamakau(1991:100-102) told the following story in 1866: Puna on Hawaii Island was the first land reached by Pa'ao,and here in Puna he built his first heiau 0 for his god Aha'uIa and named it Aha'ula[Waba'ula].It was a luakini.From Puna,Pa'ao went on to land in Kohala, at Pu'uepa.He built a heidu there called Mo'okini, a luakini. It is thought that Pa'ao came to Hawaii in the time of the a1i'i La`au because Pili ruled as mo'i after La'au.You will see Pili there in the line of succession,the mo'o kfi'auhau,of Hanala'anui.It was said that Hawaii Island was without a chief, and so a chief was brought from Kahiki; this is according to chiefly genealogies.Hawaii Island had been without a chief for a long time,and the chiefs of Hawaii were a1i'i maka'dinana or just commoners. There were seventeen generations during which Hawaii Island was without chiefs—some eight hundred years. There are several versions of this story that are discussed by Beckwith (1976), including the version where Mo'okini and Kaluawilinau,two kahuna of Moikeha,decide to stay on at Kohala.The bones of the kahuna Pa'ao are said to be deposited in a burial cave in Kohala in Pu'uwepa[possibly Pu'uepa?](Kamakau 1964:41). The concept of the ahupuaa was established during the A.D. 1400s(Kirch 1985),adding another component to a then well-stratified society. This land unit became the equivalent of a local community, with its own social, Li AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 13 4. Culture-Historical Background economic, and political significance.Ahupuaa were ruled by all`i 'ai ahupuaa or lesser chiefs; who, for the most part,had complete autonomy over this generally economically self-supporting piece of land,which was managed by a konohiki.Ahupuaa were usually wedge or pie-shaped,incorporating all of the eco-zones from the mountains to the sea and for several hundred yards beyond the shore,assuring a diverse subsistence resource base(Hommon 1986). The all`i and the makadinana (commoners)were not confined to the boundaries of the ahupuaa; when there was a perceived need,they also shared with their neighbor ahupuaa ohana(Hono-ko-hou 1974).The ahupua'a was further divided into smaller sections such as the 'ili, mooaina,paukuaina, kihapai, koele, hakuone, and k-uakua (Hamman 1986,Pogue 1978).The chiefs of these land units gave their allegiance to a territorial chief or mo`i(king). Heiau building flourished during this period as religion became more complex and embedded in a sociopolitical climate of territorial competition. Monumental architecture, such as heiau, "played a key role as visual markers of chiefly dominance"(Kirch 1990:206). The Proto-Historic Period(A.D. 1650-1795)is marked by both intensification and stress.Wars occurred between intra-island and inter-island polities.Sometime between A.D. 1736 and 1758,Kamehameha I was born in the ahupuaa of Kokoiki,North Kohala near the Mo'okini Heiau [there is some controversy about his birth year, see Kamakau 1992:66-68].The birth event is said to have occurred on a stormy night of rain,thunder,and lightning,signified the night before by a very bright,ominous star,thought by some to be Halley's comet[this is also controversial](Kamakau 1992).Kamehameha's ancestral homeland was in Halawa,North Kohala(Williams 1919). This period was one of continual conquest by the reigning all`i.Ke'eaumoka,son of Keawepoepoe,set up a fort at Pololu and Honokaue;he was attacked thereby Kalaniopu'u,so he moved to Maui.About A.D. 1759 Kalanilopu'u Li conquered East Maui,defeating his wife's brother,the Maui king Kamehamehanui,by using Hana's prominent Pu'u Kau'iki as his fortress.He appointed one of his Hawaii chiefs,Puna, as governor of Hana and Kipahulu.Kahekili became king of Maui in A.D. 1766 when Kamehamehanui died following an illness. Ke'eaumoku took his widow, Namahana, a cousin of Kamehameha 1, as his wife. Their daughter, Ka'ahumaim, the future favorite wife of Kamehameha 1, was born in a cave at the base of Pu'u Kau'iki,Hana,Maui in A.D. 1768 (Kamakau 1992). In A.D. 1775 Kalani'opu'u and his Hana forces raided and destroyed the neighboring Kaupo District,then launched several more raids on Moloka'i, Lana'i, Kaho'olawe, and parts of West Maui. It was at the battle of Kalaeoka'ilio that Kamehameha,a favorite of Kalaniopu'u,was first recognized as a great warrior and given the name of Pai'ea(hard- shelled crab)by the Maui chiefs and warriors(Kamakau 1992).During the battles between Kalaniopu'u and Kahekili (1777-1779),Ka'ahumarm and her parents left Maui to live on the island of Hawaii(Kamakau 1992). HISTORY AFTER CONTACT Captain James Cook landed in the Hawaiian Islands on January 18,1778.Ten months later,on a return trip to Hawaiian waters,Kalaniopu'u,who was at war with Kahekili,visited Cook on board the Resolution off the East coast of Maui. The following January[1779],Cook and Kalaniopu'u met again in Kealakekua Bay and exchanged gifts.In February, Cook set sail; however, a severe storm off the Kohala coast damaged a mast and they had to return to Kealakekua. Cook's return occurred at an inopportune time,and this misfortune cost him his life(Kuykendall and Day 1976). Li In 1779 King of the Cook expedition explored the North Kohala country and reported: As far as the eye could reach, seemed fruitful and well inhabited. [Three and four miles inland, plantations of taro and potatoes and wauke]neatly set out in rows.The walls that separate them are made of the loose burnt stone,which are got in clearing the ground; and being entirely concealed by sugar-canes planted close on each Side, make the most beautiful fences that can be conceived. [The exploring party stopped six or seven miles from the sea.] To the left a continuous range of villages, interspersed with groves of coconut trees spreading along the sea-shore; a thick wood L behind this;and to the right,an extent of ground laid out in regular and well-cultivated plantations . . .as they passed,they did not observe a single foot of ground,that was capable of improvement left unplanted.(Handy and Handy 1972:528) Around A.D. 1780 Kalaniopu'u proclaimed that his son Kiwalao would be his successor, and he gave the guardianship of the war god Ku'ka'ilimoku to Kamehameha. Kamehameha and a few other chiefs were concerned about their land claims,which Kiwalao did not seem to honor,so after usurping Kiwalao's authority with a sacrificial ritual,Kamehameha retreated to his district of Kohala. While in Kohala,Kamehameha farmed the land,growing taro and sweet potatoes(Handy and Handy 1972).After Kalani'opu'u died in A.D. 1782 civil war broke out:Kiwalao was killed.The wars between Maui and Hawaii continued until A.D. 1795(Kuykendall and Day 1976;Handy and Handy 1972). 14 AIS Update for TNM:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 4. Culture-Historical Background Pil In 1790 two Western ships,the Eleanora and Fair American,were trading in Hawaiian waters.As retribution for the theft of a skiff and the murder of one of the sailors,the crew of the Eleanora massacred more than 100 natives at Olowalu[Maui].The Eleanora then sailed to Hawaii Island,and one of its crew,John Young,went ashore,where he was detained by Kamehameha.The other vessel,the Fair American, was captured by the forces of Kamehameha off the Kekaha coast and its crew was killed except for one member, Isaac Davis. Kame'eiarnoku, who resided in Ka'apulehu at the time,played a lead role in this incident.He and his followers recovered several foreign arms.from the Fair American, including a cannon that they called "Lopaka7, all of which were turned over to Kamehameha (Kamakau 1992).Kamehameha made Young and Davis his advisors.He also kept the vessel as part of his fleet.With the aid of his new advisors,new ship,and foreign arms Kamehameha conquered Maui,and by 1796 he had conquered all the island kingdoms except Kauai. It wasn't -until 1810, when Kaumuali'i of Kauai gave his allegiance to Kamehameha,that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler(Kuykendall and Day 1976). Demographic trends during this period indicate population reduction in some areas,due to war and disease,yet increases in others,with relatively little change in material culture.However,there was a continued trend toward craft and status specialization, intensification of agriculture, a1i'i controlled aquaculture,upland residential sites, and the enhancement of traditional oral history.The Ku cult,luakini heiau,and the kapu system were at their peaks,although western influence was already altering the cultural fabric of the Islands (Kirch 1985; Kent 1983). Foreigners had introduced the concept of trade for profit,and by the time Kamehameha I had conquered Oahu,Maui and Moloka'i, in 1795, Hawaii saw the beginnings of a market system economy(Kent 1983). This marked the end of an era of uniquely Hawaiian culture. Hawai'i's culture and economy continued to change drastically as capitalism and industry established a firm foothold.The sandalwood(Santalum ellipticum)trade,established by Euro-Americans in 1790 and turned into a viable commercial enterprise by 1805(Oliver 1961),was flourishing by 1810.This added to the breakdown of the traditional subsistence system, as farmers and fishermen were ordered to spend most of their time logging, resulting in food shortages and famine that led to a population decline. Kamehameha did manage to maintain some control over the trade(Kuykendall and Day 1976;Kent 1983). Kamehameha I died on May 8, 1819 at Kamakahonu in Kailua-Kona,and once again the culture of Hawaii was to change radically.Following the death of a prominent chief,it was customary to remove all of the.regular kapu that maintained social order and the separation of men and women and elite and commoner. Thus, following Kamehameha's death a period of'ai noa(free eating)was observed along with the relaxation of other traditional kapu. It was for the new ruler and kahuna to re-establish kapu and restore social order,but at this point in history traditional customs saw a change: The death of Kamehameha was the first step in the ending of the tabus; the second was the modifying of the mourning ceremonies;the third,the ending of the tabu of the chief;the fourth,the ending of carrying the tabu chiefs in the arms and feeding them;the fifth,the ruling chiefs decision to introduce free eating(ainoa) after the death of Kamehameha; the sixth,the cooperation of his aunts, Ka-ahu-mamt and Ka-heihei-malie; the seventh, the joint action of the chiefs in eating together at the suggestion of the ruling chief,so that free eating became an established fact and the n credit of establishing the custom went to the ruling chief. This custom was not so much of an Ll innovation as might be supposed.In old days the period of mourning at the death of a ruling chief who had been greatly beloved was a time of license.The women were allowed to enter the heiau,to eat bananas,coconuts,and pork,and to climb over the sacred places.You will find record of this in the history of Ka-ula-hea-nui-o-ka-moku,in that of Ku-ali'i, and in most of the histories of ancient rulers.Free eating followed the death of the ruling chief;after the period of mourning was over the new ruler placed the land under a new tabu following old lines.(Kamakau 1992:222) Immediately upon the death of Kamehameha 1,Liholiho,(his son and to be successor)was sent away to Kawaihae to keep him safe from the impurities of Kamakahonu brought about from the death of Kamehameha.After purification ceremonies Liholiho returned to Kamakahonu: Then Liholiho on this first night of his arrival ate some of the tabu dog meat free only to the chiefesses;he entered the lauhala house free only to them;whatever he desired he reached out for; everything was supplied,even those things generally to be found only in a tabu house.The people P saw the men drinking rum with the women kahu and smoking tobacco,and thought it was to mark the ending of the tabu of a chief.The chiefs saw with satisfaction the ending of the chief's tabu and the freeing of the eating tabu.The kahu said to the chief,"Make eating free over the whole kingdom AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kalrua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 15 r-. 4. Culture-Historical Background 11 from Hawaii to Oahu and let it be extended to Kauai!" and Liholiho consented. Then pork to be eaten free was taken to the country districts and given to commoners, both men and women, and free eating was introduced all over the group.Messengers were sent to Maui,Molokai, Oahu and -' all the way to Kauai, Ka-umu-ali`i consented to the free eating and it was accepted on Kauai. (Kamakau 1992:225) When Liholiho Kamehameha II ate the ka do meat,entered the lauhala house and did whatever he desired �- it was still during a u p g time when he had not reinstituted the eating kapu but others appear to have thought otherwise. Liholiho's cousin, Kekuaokalani, caretaker of the war god Ka'kd'ilimoku, revolted, but by December of 1819 the revolution was quelled. With an indefinite period of free-eating and the lack of the reinstatement of other kapu extending from Hawaii to Kauai, and the arrival of the Christian missionaries shortly thereafter, the traditional religion had been officially replaced by Christianity within a year following the death of Kamehameha I.Kamehameha r- II sent edicts throughout the kingdom renouncing the ancient state religion, ordering the destruction of the heiau ? images, and ordering that the heiau structures be destroyed or abandoned and left to deteriorate. He did, however, allow the personal family religion,the `aumakua worship,to continue(Oliver 1961;Kamakau 1992). In October of 1819, seventeen Protestant missionaries set sail from Boston to Hawaii. They arrived in Kailua- Kona on March 30, 1820 to a society with a religious void to fill. Many of the ah`i, who were already exposed to western material culture,welcomed the opportunity to become educated in a western style and adopt their dress and religion. Soon they were rewarding their teachers with land and positions in the Hawaiian government. During this period,the sandalwood trade was wreaking havoc on the commoners,who were weakening with the heavy production, exposure, and famine just to fill the coffers of the ali`i who were no longer under any traditional constraints(Oliver 1961;Kuykendall and Day 1976).On a stopover in the Kohala district Ellis wrote: About eleven at night we reached Towaihae [Kawaihae], where we were kindly received by Mr. 1 Young. . . . Before daylight on the 22nd, we were roused by vast multitudes of people passing through the district from Waimea with sandal-wood,which had been cut in the adjacent mountains for Karaimoku,by the people of Waimea,and which the people of Kohala,as far as the north point, j had been ordered to bring down to his storehouse on the beach,for the purpose of its being shipped to Oahu.There were between two and three thousand men,carrying each from one to six pieces of sandal=wood,according to their size and weight.It was generally tied on their backs by bands of ti leaves,passed over the shoulders and under the arms,and fastened across their breasts.(Kuykendall and Day 1976:42,43;Ellis 1963:397) The lack of control of the sandalwood trade was to soon lead to the first Hawaiian national debt as promissory notes and levies were initiated by American traders and enforced by American warships(Oliver 1961).The Hawaiian culture was well on its way towards Western assimilation as industry in Hawaii went from the sandalwood trade,to a short-lived whaling industry,to the more lucrative,but environmentally destructive sugar industry. The windward portions of North Kohala became a center of sugarcane production,although sugarcane cultivation in Kohala had its origins in prehistory. Pukui(1983)cites two proverbs that reference both Kohala and sugarcane.She provides an explanation and notes that Hawaiian proverbs have layers of meaning that are best left to the imagination of the reader: `^a' He pa`a ko kea no Kohala, e kole ai ka waha ke `ai A resistant white sugar cane of Kohala that injures the mouth when eaten. tws g j Pukui explains this proverb as follows: A person that one does not tamper with. This was the retort of Pupukea,a Hawaii chief, �!. when the Maui chief Makakuikalani made fun of his small stature. It was later used in praise of the warriors of Kohala,who were known for valor(1983:95). -; 7 `ike `ia no o Kohala i ka Poe ko, a o ka pae ko is kole ai ka waha. One can recognize Kohala by her rows of sugar cane which can make the mouth raw when chewed. Pukui interprets this proverb as follows: When one wanted to fight a Kohala warrior,he would have to be a very good warrior to succeed. Kohala men were vigorous,brave,and strong(1983:127). i ! 16 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 4. Culture-Historical Background Sugarcane(Saccharum officinarum) was a Polynesian introduction and served a variety of uses. The ko kea or white cane was the most common,usually planted near Hawaiian homes for medicinal purposes, and to counteract bad tastes(Handy and Handy 1972:185). Sugarcane was a snack,condiment,famine food;fed to nursing babies,and helped to strengthen children's teeth by chewing on it(Handy and Handy 1972:187). It was used to thatch houses when pili grass (Heteropogon contortus) or lau halo (Pandanus odortissimus) were not abundant (Malo 1951). Sugarcane was also used in relation to taro and sweet potato.Handy and Handy(1972:186)explain: In wet-taro farming, cane was planted along the embankments separating the flooded terraces and flats. In dry-taro and sweet-potato fields on the sloping kula or in the lower forest zone,cane was planted as hedges along the lines of stone and rubbish thrown up between the fields.Thus it helped the planter to utilize to the maximum his soil and water,and acted as a windbreak against the gusty breezes which blow in most valley bottoms, along the coasts, and on the uplands where taro is grown. Sugarcane was grown on all islands, and when Cook arrived he wrote of seeing sugarcane plantations. The Chinese on Lanai are credited with producing sugar first,as early as 1802.However,it was not until 1835 that sugar became established commercially, replacing the waning sandalwood industry (Oliver 1961, Kuykendall and Day 1976). Kohala became a land in transition and eventually a major force in the sugar industry with the arrival of American missionary Elias Bond (KTF 1975). In her comprehensive study of North Kohala, Tomonari-Tuggle relates this transition: The arrival in 1841 of Elias Bond,of the Protestant American Board of Commissioners for Foreign Missions,to Kohala marked the beginning of a 22-year period of transition in the district's history. In those years a new religion, a new land tenure system, and a changing economy altered the lifestyles and world view of the indigenous population of the district. The Kohala community was in flux, attempting to find a firm footing in a changing world, in a much larger network of social, political,and economic interactions than had previously existed.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:1-23) When Elias Bond directed his efforts to initiating sugar as a major agricultural industry in Kohala, he could not have foreseen the incredible success of his modest venture.His primary concern was to develop a means for the Hawaiian people of the district to compete successfully in the market economy that had evolved in Hawaii.What resulted was a vigorous,stable,and competitive industry which survived over a century of changing economic situations.For the Hawaiian people,however, the impact was not what Bond anticipated.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:1-39) In 1860 Rev.Bond engaged Samuel N.Castle in founding the Kohala Sugar Company on lands owned by Bond and his neighbor Dr.James Wight.The first crop was harvested in January 1865(KTF 1975).Kohala's transition was a reflection of what was happening elsewhere in Hawaii as the sugar industry grew.The industry brought in tens of thousands of laborers from Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa to work on the many plantations and mills that were being established on all major islands(Oliver 1961).This influx not only radically changed the culture, but also drastically altered agricultural lands and destroyed traditional architectural features in the process.The drier leeward portions of Kohala were not suited for cane cultivation and thus became vast pasturelands for grazing cattle. A GENERALIZED SETTLEMENT MODEL FOR KOHALA WAHO The following summary of settlement patterns for the leeward coast of North Kohala follows earlier regional models (Rosendahl 1972; Griffin et al. 1971; Tomonari-Tuggle 1988) and takes into account observations and information contained in traveler,missionary,and Kingdom records(Maly 2000). Evidence for early occupation of Kohala has been collected from Kapa`anui. Dunn and Rosendahl (1989) recovered radiocarbon samples that potentially date to as early as A.D.460(Site 12444).This early date may be related to the establishment of small,short-term camps to exploit seasonal,coastal resources(or more likely are the result of an anomalous radiocarbon assay;see Kirch 2011).Data recovered from Mahukona suggest initial occupation there by A.D. 1280(Burgett and Rosendahl 1993:36).The earliest date range for permanent settlement in Kohala(A.D. 1300) was obtained from Koai`e,a coastal settlement where subsistence primarily derived from marine resources.According to Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:13),these resources were probably supplemented by small-scale agriculture. The period from A.D. 1300-1500 was characterized by population growth and expanded efforts to increase upland agriculture.Rosendahl(1972)has proposed that settlement at this time was related to seasonal,recurrent occupation in which coastal sites were occupied in the summer to exploit marine resources,and upland sites were occupied during AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 17 4. Culture-Historical Background the winter months, with a focus on agriculture. An increasing reliance on agricultural products may have caused a 7 shift in social networks as well, according to Hommon(1976). Hommon argues that kinship links between coastal settlements disintegrated as those links within the mauka-makai settlements expanded to accommodate exchange of - agricultural products for marine resources.This shift is believed to have resulted in the establishment of the ahupua`a system.The implications of this model include a shift in residential patterns from seasonal,temporary occupation,to permanent dispersed occupation of both coastal and upland areas. This pattern continued to intensify from A.D. 1500 to Contact(A.D. 1778),and there is evidence that suggests that there were substantial changes to the political system as well. Within Kohala,the Great Wall complex at Koai`e is r--; organized with platforms in the complex apart from contemporaneous features. Griffin et al. (197 1)interpret this as symbolizing class stratification.By A.D. 1600,there is island-wide evidence to suggest that growing conflicts between � ' independent chiefdoms were resolved through warfare,culminating in a unified political structure at the district level. It has been suggested that this unification resulted in a partial abandonment of portions of leeward Hawaii, with people moving to more favorable agricultural areas(Barrera 1971;Schilt and Sinoto 1980). By the time of contact,numerous coastal villages and extensive dryland agricultural systems were in place in North Kohala.The ahupua`a system of social organization was also firmly established by this time,with defined land units extending from the mountains to the sea.The ahupua`a were controlled by local chiefs, and were integrated at the district level. Districts were ruled by paramount chiefs through a system of taxation and redistribution. Social stratification was defined by a class separation between the ruling all`i (chiefs) at one end, and the maka`dinana (commoners)at the other.Kamehameha I eventually united the Island of Hawaii,and ultimately all of the Hawaiian Islands,and freely participated in the European-introduced market economy. The earliest detailed written descriptions of the region are contained in the Journal of William Ellis(1963), an English Missionary who traveled through the area in 1823. Two of his journal entries are of particular relevance: a visit to the villages of Owawarua[Awalua] (just south of Kukuipahu)and Hihiu(Mahukona),and an account of the coast between Towaihae[Kawaihae]and Mahukona related to him by one of his companions named Lorrin Thurston. About three p.m.we reached Owawarua,a considerable village on the north-west coast,inhabited mostly by fisherman.Here we tried to collect a congregation,but only three women and two small E children remained in the place,the rest having gone to Waimea to fetch sandalwood for Karaiomoku. From Owawarua we passed on to Hihiu,where we had an opportunity to speak to a small pang of natives. In these villages we saw numbers of canoes and many large fishing nets,which are generally made with a native kind of flax,very strong and durable. . .In taking fish out of the sea,they commonly make use of a net, of which they have many kinds, some very large, others mere hand-nets;they occasionally employ the hook and line,but never use the spear or dart which is a favourite weapon Lx with the southern islanders. Quantities of fish were spread out in the sun to dry, in several places, and the inhabitants of the D' northern shores seem better supplied with this article than those of any other part of the island. . . . D' Being considerably fatigued,and unable to find any fresh water in the village,we procured a canoe to take us to Towaihae, from which we were distant about 20 miles.Though we had numbered,in j our journey today,600 houses,we had not seen a thing like four hundred people,almost the whole jj population being employed in the mountains cutting sandalwood.It was about seven o'clock in the evening when we sailed from Hihiu,in a single canoe.(Ellis 1963:285-286) On the 23d Mr. Thurston left Towaihae, and walked along the shore towards the north point [`Upolu]. About noon he reached the small village, called Kipi [North of Kahuali`ili`i],where he preached to the people; and as there was only one village between Kipi and the place where I had preached on Wednesday evening[HihiulMahukona],he retraced his steps to Towaihae.He preached at another four villages on his return[perhaps at settlements within or adjacent to the current project area],where the congregations,though not numerous,were attentive. . .The coast was barren;the rocks volcanic; the men were all employed in fishing; and Mr. Thurston was informed that the inhabitants of the plantations,about seven miles in the interior,were far more numerous than on the L shore.In the evening he reached Towaihae.(Ellis 1963:288) As early as the 1830s, missionaries in Kohala noting that "deaths are more numerous than births; [h]ence the population is decreasing"(Doyle 1953:72)began compiling census records by ahupua`a.In an 1835 census,Kahua (combined) is listed as having a resident population of 256 (Schmidt 1973:27), documenting a sizeable population. 18 AIS Update for TMK.:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua I",North Kohala,Hawaii I 4. Culture-Historical Background Traditional and historical accounts indicate that the residents of the ahupua`a in Kohala waho lived both along the coast in fishing villages and in the uplands near the agricultural systems.It is interesting that within Kahua there were 256 residents recorded in 1835, and that eleven years later in 1846 there was only one claimant for a kuleana in U Kahuanui during the Mahele;the claim was not awarded having been contested by Kekuanao`a. CCJJ Traditional land use patterns saw a rapid shift after the Mahele in 1848. By the mid-19th century, leeward settlement shifted to the windward side of North Kohala as the leeward,agriculturally marginal,areas were abandoned in favor of more productive and wetter sugarcane lands. In addition,native populations were decimated by disease and a depressed birth rate.According to Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:37),the remnant leeward population nucleated into a few small coastal communities and dispersed upland settlements. Settlements were no longer based on traditional subsistence patterns,largely because of the loss of access to the full range of necessary resources.At this point most U communities were centered on sugar mills and became part of the plantation social hierarchy. Much of the coastal land in leeward North Kohala was used as cattle pasture.Walled complexes became the dominant residential structure for those remaining leeward settlements as families enclosed their holdings to protect them from feral cattle and to clearly define their kuleana boundaries. u Kahufffl`ili`i Ahupua`a Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a is one of the three southernmost ahupua`a of the North Kohala District (only Kahuanui Ahupua`a and Waika Ahupua`a, along the North Kohala/South Kohala boundary, are further south; see Figure 2). During the Mahele all three of these ahupua`a were awarded to ali`i. Kahuali`ili`i was awarded to Lot Kapuaiwa (Kamehameha V)as LCAw.7715:5,Kahuanui was awarded to Victoria Kamamalu(Lot's Sister and last Kahina-Nui of Hawaii)as LCAw.7713:4,and Waika was awarded to Gina Lahilahi(daughter of John Young)as LCAw. 8020- B:2.Pahinahina Ahupua`a,bordering Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a to the north,was retained as Government Land. There were no kuleana awarded within Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a during.the Mahele. By 1857 Kahuali`ili`i had been leased by Lot Kapuaiwa to G.W.Macey,who also leased Waika Ahupua`a from LI Victoria Kamamalu in 1859 (Graves and Franklin 1998). An 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S. C. Wiltse (Figure 11) shows a"Road to Macy[sic] and Vida's Ranch"that extends from the coast within the current project area(labeled"Waiakailio Landing")inland towards Kahuanui and Waika ahupua`a,suggesting that Macey had leased the lands for ranching purposes,and that Waiakailio Bay was the landing for the ranch.Later Boundary Commission testimony (in 1873; see below) indicates that the houses belonging to Macey and Vida were located near the KahuanuitWaika boundary close to the Government Road, well mauka of the current project area. Ownership of Kahuali`ili`i and Waika,which would eventually become part of Kahua Ranch,changed hands several times during the second half of the nineteenth century.In the 1890s these lands were sold(along with other lands)to John Maguire, who managed Huehue Ranch in Kona. In about 1895 Mr. Maguire sold a half interest in the Kahua lands to James Frank Woods,who then assumed management of the property and later purchased the half interest that John Maguire LI still held(Henke 1929). In 1862, to certify the boundaries of the ahupua`a awarded during the Mahele, the Kingdom of Hawai'i established the Boundary Commission. The primary informants for the boundary descriptions were elder native residents.Their testimony provides a wealth of information concerning the locations of place names and landmarks. Some of the witnesses also inform about the functions of certain areas on the landscape(e.g.,resting places,residential areas, agricultural plots, fishing grounds, boundary markers). This information is very useful when interpreting �- archaeological features as elements of a cultural landscape. Many of the locations referenced in the boundary U testimony are depicted on a map of the lands of Waika and Kahuali`ili`i prepared by A.B. Lobenstein in 1903,the year when the boundaries of those ahupua`a were officially set(Hawai`i Registered Map No. 2231;Figure 12).The 1903 map also shows the route of the ala loa (coastal trail) between Kawaihae and Mahukona across the current project area. LI AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1�,North Kohala,Hawaii 19 4. Culture-Historical Background A4 J, { ^5' wdy'�M1 tta 311 pw a r 441 r �� �'' �frrlN .�, •�� IJ ' '. 6,a jflrrt 17, 41 •'�i etc. �*'`Cw y 1!',i~' Jflrtf ,�— AOv } �r ,Z, liu { X t(l4rn f r a r/Jrt7� ri4, f` frJ /fi d r•HA, rr i+ �I Project area Figure 11. 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S.C.Wiltse showing the current project area. 20 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii i 4. Culture-Historical Background Detail of project area. r All 17, �. a +yip / J�J�t• ..^t S�T Mk' t S � mi 1 i a T Ir }{ Glc ry �v t _. • k _•. h 3u xr _Ar AF 7- P, � � r . >`J �I � • rr f x r 'kir {}FTN£I �,141�GOF _- WIG Plroject area v'�� MOR ry 1011AX,84W4& Figure 12.Hawaii Registered Map No.2231 (prepared by A.B.Lobenstein in 1903)showing the current project _. area. AIS Update for T'MK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 21 II 4. Culture-Historical Background �i Hearings for establishing the boundaries of Kahuali`ili`i(also known as Kahua 11t)began in November of 1873, roughly one year after Lot Kapuaiwa died; apparently the ahupua`a became part of his father's (M. Kekuanao`a) estate.The boundaries were not officially set until December of 1903,by which time the land in question had been acquired by James Woods.The 1873 boundary testimony reads as follows: Kaili,kane, sworn,I was born in Kohala at the time of the great famine,now live in Kokio;know 7 the boundaries of Kahualiilii.Kiha,my Father and Pohina,my Uncle,showed them to me.I do not know all the boundaries between Kahuanui and Kahualiilii.Bounded on the north side at shore by the land of Pahinahina,commencing at a cave called Lehua,the boundary runs makai to a point at the sea shore called Kananakauwa;thence it runs mauka to a pile of rocks at Lehua;thence mauka lto an ahu named Panipani; thence mauka to another pile of stones and thence to a place, called Kilohana where there is a pile of stones that Kahulu and I built when Wiltse was surveying. Kilohana is an old resting place;thence mauka to Ahuaele;an alma with a pile of stones on it;thence mauka to Pahukinikini, [page 139] a small ahua with a pile of rocks on it;thence to Puuolani hill, _j this is along the land of Pahinahina;that was sold to Makuaole and is now owned by Kanehaloa of Puuehuehue; thence to Lolelole, the mauka corner of land sold; thence mauka to Ahaloa, an old P kauhale at the mauka corner of Pahinahina;thence along Makeloa(belonging to Kamehameha& Estate);thence the boundary runs mauka to Kalolo,a water hole in a gulch,thence across the gulch and mauka along the land of Kalala;thence mauka to Puukoa;a hill of Koa,at the mauka corner of Kanehalo's land; thence along Kailikea, a land mauka of Puukoa(Wiltse, in surveying, cut off a Ell corner of Kalala,and ran the line to Holeipalaoa gulch);there is a rock there on the mauka side of the gulch marked KK; thence it is bounded by Kehena to Kilohana on Honokane pati (Note See Certificate of boundaries of Kehena);Thence along Honokane pali towards Waimea,to the Waimea Ell side of Puuwau hill,the boundary being some distance this way of the kauhale;Bounded at shore by a small gulch called Haaho, a rock marked K is at this place;thence up the gulch to an ahua; thence up to where Keawewai gulch crosses Haolo gulch; thence the boundary runs up the north side of the gulch;thence to a place called Kapakamakahonu;thence to Pohakuloa, a large rock in the gulch; thence to an alma; thence to Kawaihae Government road; thence to Puuala; thence to Niupaa, a bullock pen, the boundary passing through the center of the pen. Thence it crosses the Government road to the wire fence some distance to the north of Upida's[Vida's?]old house;thence IE, to Puumanu; thence to the south side of Ahumoa; thence on the north side of Waiakananaula, a water place;thence to Puuiki and from thence to Honokane pali. Boundary Commission hearings for Kahuanui Ahupua`a(also known as Kahua 2nd), which shares a boundary with Kahuali`ili`i Ahupua`a also began in November of 1873,but the boundaries were not set until June of 1905.The petitioner and owner of the land was James W.Austin,who had acquired the land from Victoria Kamamalu and M. Kekuanao`a in 1862(Graves and Franklin 1998).By the time the boundaries were set in 1905 Austin had died and the lands had passed on to the Austin Estate.The 1873 boundary testimony for Kahuanui reads as follows: Kekua,kane,sworn,I was born at the time of Aepapa and have always lived at Kahua until lately. Kahuanui is bounded on the Kona side by Waika.Commencing at the mouth of a gulch the boundary between the Ahupuaa and Kupono begins at a landing place called Kaiopae;thence mauka along the Kuponos to Ahukuli,a pile of stones;thence mauka to Puueoka,a heiau;thence to along stone named Pohakuloa;thence to Kamakaiwi, a resting place;thence to Kapio;thence to Ahumoa,the boundary running through the hills;thence to Puuiki;thence to Kanoa,where fire used to be;Thence to Kahawaikukae,to pali of Kahawaiki;thence to Kahawaiholopapa;thence to Ainamakanui at the head of Honokane Gulch. _ The kupono Kahawainui,Kukui runs up here.Waika ends at Pahoakala,a place where they used to ( ` gather mamaki.This is as far as I[page 145]know the boundaries on this side.I have heard that the land runs down to Mahiki in Hamakua.When Lyons surveyed Waika he cut across the kupono of Kahua and included them in Waika. Know a place called Ahuanaha. The real boundary is from -I Oneloa to Kapai,a pile of stones by the road;thence to Kamamukaa,where the gulch is the boundary between Waika and Kahua.The boundary crosses the gulch to the Kohala side at Ahuanaha;thence it runs to Ahuakapaakea; thence mauka to Kalehua; thence up the gulch to Moalau (The pile of stones is way on the Kohala side of the gulch,but the boundary is at the gulch).Thence past Macy's (G.W.Macy's)old house and mauka to Hookeke;thence to kahawai Palapalai;thence mauka to the t_ 22 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii L 4. Culture-Historical Background pall of Kaloloulaula on Pili; thence to Kapohoakala; thence along to Kahaliaina, a place below Puupala, where Kawaihae joins Kahua. From Kahaliaina the boundary runs along the foot of the pall to just above Puuwau on Kahuanui.Puuwau is a hill a short distance back from Pili;thence to Hinamakanui, a cabbage garden on the brow of Honokane pali. The boundary at shore between Kahuanui and Kahualiilii is a rock in the middle of the sea called Kahuapopolo. (Note: Kaauwai, kane puts the boundary a few rods on the Kohala side of this rock.) Thence to Waiakanalopaia, a pool of water at the end of the gulch,thence to Pohakupalahalaha,a wall below the road to Kawaihae,now called Kaniakahorm;thence to Waikalio gulch;thence the boundary runs to a stone called Pohakuloa; thence mauka across Pohakulaoa gulch to Puanau, a resting place;thence to Puuala;thence Kipawale,a resting place at the Government road;thence to a hill called Ahuamanu;thence to Waiakapiai;thence to Ahumoa,part,of which is on Kahua and part on another land.This is all I know of the boundaries. Frank Woods continued to ranch the Kahud lands throughout the first half of the twentieth century. The 1913 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle shows some of the ranch's infrastructure,including a trail labeled"Beach Trail"that leads to the coast within the current project area(Figure 13). This trail alignment appears to be similar to the road alignment(to Macy and Vida's Ranch)that is shown on the 1859 map of Kahudli'ili'i prepared by S. C.Wiltse(see Figure 11).By the 1920s,Woods was leasing much of the area to Ronald Kameharneha o Ka Hae Hawaii von Holt and Herbert Montague Richards,Sr.,who had both come to Hawaii from Oahu to pursue cattle ranching.By the late 1920s to early 1930s, von Holt and Richards had purchased the lands they were leasing from Woods as well as Kahudnui from the Austin heirs,thus consolidating the Kahud ahupuaa with Waika Ahupua'a into what has become known as Kahud Ranch(Langlas 1994).A map of Kahudli'ili'i,Kahuanui,and Waikd ahupuaa filed on July 15, 1931 with Land Court Application 1043 (Figure 14)shows some additional ranching infrastructure within these ahupuaa including a fence line that extends to the coast within the current project area and a trail,labeled"Ancient Trail",that follows the southern edge of the fence to the coast where it meets the ala loa.Both of the trail alignments depicted on the 1931 map are different than the alignments depicted on older maps. The ala loa, which is also labeled as the "Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail",is shown further inland at the southern end of the current project area than it is on the 1903 map(see Figure 12).Also,the maukalmakai trail is located further north than the road shown on the 1859 map (see Figure 11)and the trail shown on the 1913 U.S.G.S.map(see Figure 13),suggesting that both of these trails had been realigned by 1931.It was during the court proceedings associated with these land court applications that the pre- Jeep road Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail was described as having a five foot width. The legal proceedings were conducted over a seven year period and were focused on establishing legal ownership of several adjoining parcels and roadway corridors traversing those parcels. The final ruling of the courts during these proceedings was that the Territory of Hawaii would relinquish any claims to the Mahukona-Kawaihae Beach Trail in exchange for ownership of the Kohala to Kawaihae Road(the current Kohala Mountain Road),thus the current project area remained in the ownership of Kahud Ranch with no encumbrances. Although no longer a public right-of-way, the coastal ala loa continued to serve as a non-vehicular access corridor between Mahukona and Kawaihae. The ala loa trail was improved for vehicular travel in the early 1940s in conjunction with the U.S.Army's efforts to provide an adequate coastal defense system during WWII.Subsequent to WWII,Kahua Ranch maintained the roadway across their lands for ranching,transportation,and recreational uses. According to Langlas (1994), the partners, Richards and von Holt, eventually expanded Kahud Ranch through leases and purchases of private land to almost 30,000 acres.Orr(2003:46)describes that although Herbert,Sr.served on the board of Kahua Ranch,Atherton Richards(Herbert's brother)was von Holt's"the real partner."In 1953 von Holt died and Herbert, Jr. (better known as Monty) returned to Hawaii after finishing school on the mainland; gradually Monty took over as manager of the Ranch(OCA 2000). The 1956 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle shows some of the Kahud Ranch lands and infrastructure(Figure 14),including a fence,line and"Beach Trail"extending to the coast within the current project area.A windmill(recorded as part of Site 16133)is shown adjacent to the fence line at the coast within the current project area.Both the fence line and trail are different alignments than are shown on the 1931 Land Court Application 1043 map(see Figure 12). A trail is also shown extending parallel to the coast through the project area on the 1956 map (following an alignment similar to that of the Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail shown on the 1931 map).In 1973,when construction of the current Akoni-Pule Highway was completed,most if not all of the vehicular traffic between Mahukona and Kawaihae shifted away from the coastal Jeep road to the newly constructed highway. By 1982, the coastal trail is no longer shown on the U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle. The Richards and von Holt families jointly operated Kahua Ranch until the 1980s at which point it was legally split into two entities.The current project area was severed from the ranch and sold around this time.Today,the Richards family operates Kahud Ranch and the von Holt family operates Ponoholo Ranch. AIS Update for TNIK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 23 4. Culture-Historical Background W fj, r. ��4 - .x r oaf r 'x-^, J mWr m '` ^ 6-.�ti !' ✓ r nw4 fiiL I ! �„�x!� v r r W arp �mn•� �t�r"°� f �, ��� �`� + �ytry,+9 >w�,Wyf .' f � � AM,Y' o m ,,pp +Y�' ,� a Y "'� p ✓ z^Va d . �x, a ,y u r / ,fir b* i r a - ,""" 7Gi✓ r a� xa'z 'y 4 f project G.t TC.F"@ul 1F^°Xfir r�6 JII +a rsnr 6 ^' We ^� .vx" "�a x iJ r e "w %,v„x� xl f n, w 5 w �?I P"f I a �' e �wO f ` c4l1 �". ^'" y �✓° x 1 fi � z � �5',j ry. r f � o r i •~n'� � ofm � P f "'. r r � &� n r Detail 41f lYr6,jt.t a8"eao ,I�, 4 r ° idrl s -I a y ° eT k 24 fT W m' Ba 1 "" q .a . AG'2caw rI ro Figure 13. 1913 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area. 24 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 1 i 4. Culture-Historical Background til � ° �,„.„Wdp�p d ''b ,,11{� ifs I.^ N !f dj0� �' �g W" Hn 4 Or id °`41d' � P ;rio i t xt { d ua�'" ¢� >a44 ems � @ lh ,. n � ° 9i. 'b Cn e aM„ i ✓ 4 " �r 1 Detail of area �4tdr� i°k.'yACI W W, wJ ca" �e p 1 r, R ° f�.���;g e t r u6 � �',�� �°'"`e^a✓ ern rra�.. vd'wIad�Wd Pt srva r V lC � a f xN., w W y r tt 5 A I 1 �4i �u "4 �Ma _. Figure 14.Portion of the 1931 Land Court Application map 1043 showing the current project area. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 25 4. Culture-Historical Background E11� «,b t F w s r r p;p e_ r. r n n r 104 ,«...,.«.� - - - ------- Figure 15. 1956 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle showing the current project area. 26 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua V,North Kohala,Hawaii D 5. Archaeological Fieldwork 5. ARCHAEOLOGICAL FIELDWORK An intensive AIS of the current project area was conducted on December 1-3, 2009 by J. David Nelson, B.A., Christopher S.Hand,B.A.,Johnny R.Dudoit,B.A.,and Ashton K.Dircks Ah Sam,B.A.under the direction of Robert B.Rechtman,Ph.D.Additional survey and subsurface testing at selected features was conducted on February 23 and 24,2010 by Robert B.Rechtman,Ph.D.,Matthew R.Clark,B.A.,and by J.David Nelson,B.A.A search for remnants M of the trails shown on the various Historic maps reviewed for this study was undertaken by Robert B. Rechtman, Ph.D.,Matthew R.Clark,B.A.,and Ashton K.Dircks Ah Sam,B.A.on August 22,2013. U During the intensive pedestrian survey of the study area, the entire parcel was subject to north/south transects with fieldworkers spaced at 10-meter intervals.When archaeological resources were encountered,they were compared to existing site location maps and descriptions to determine if they had been previously recorded. If they had been recorded during the earlier studies, the sites were examined to see that the earlier site descriptions and temporal associations were consistent with current field observations. Features and sites were examined for indicators of temporal affiliation and then, based on a diverse set of criteria, assigned to one or more of the three generic time periods commonly used to describe sites in Hawaiian archaeology(Precontact,Historic,or Modem).The criteria used to assign features to a particular time period include architectural style,construction materials,location,proximity and similarity to other features,associated cultural material,and the accumulated knowledge of Hawaiian archaeological forms. Several lines of evidence,including the accumulated archaeological data,historical documentary research,the MCIhele and grant records, and oral historical information, can be used in combination to identify features whose construction, or most recent use, likely dates to the Historic Period. One common indicator of Historic Period utilization of a feature is the presence of Historic Period artifacts. The presence(or absence) of Historic artifacts is often used as a relative dating technique in Hawaiian archaeology.Cordy et al.explain that: Certain artifact types were introduced after European Contact—A.D. 1778,the arrival of Captain Cook.These include objects made from materials such as metal,glass,ceramics,and chert.Common artifact types made from these materials include metal nails and spikes,barrel hoops,cans,knives, and bullets;glass bottles and window panes;ceramic pipes,plates,bowls,cups and beads;and chert gun flints. A less frequently considered artifact is concrete used as a construction material. The presence of these objects and materials are indicators of post-A.D. 1778 age. Obviously, historic artifacts were not immediately adopted island-wide by A.D. 1778.Trade objects probably were not numerous until after 1790-1800,so the absence of the items could possibly indicate an early historic period age also.(1991:459) Features that lack Historic Period artifact types and construction styles may still be assigned to the Historic Period based on their associations with, or locations relative to, places or features known through historical documentary research or oral historical information to have been loci of Historic Period use.However,with no specific information indicating that a particular site without Historic Period artifacts or construction techniques (i.e. core-filled wall construction)was occupied post 1778,that site will be assigned a Precontact association. Such as assignment can be revised if appropriate as a result of any subsequent data recovery work. All thirty-nine of the previously recorded sites were identified,and while the earlier plotting of site locations was not wholly accurate, in all but six cases,the site descriptions were adequate. Additionally, a portion of a previously unrecognized site—Site 29271,the ala loa coastal trail/Jeep road,commonly labeled the"Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail" on maps produced prior to 1931—was recorded across the project area. Of these seven omissions from the previous AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998),the following four were deemed potentially significant enough to warrant further A18 investigation: at Site 2496, a burial platform (designated as Feature D)was mislocated and inaccurately characterized as an agricultural mound;at Site 4013 a rock shelter feature (designated as Feature D) was not recorded; and at Site 15261 two additional branches of the trail alignment (designated Features B and Q that are shown on Historic maps were identified. At the four sites where further documentation was deemed warranted various strategies were employed to integrate the newly collected information with the previously documented historic properties.At Sites 2496 and 4013 the new observations had the potential to reveal previously undocumented burials. As such Feature D of Site 2496 was remapped and subject to subsurface testing, and the newly observed rock shelter(Feature D)at Site 4013 was mapped and subject to subsurface testing. At Sites 15261 and 29271 the trail/road alignments were mapped across the property and photographed. Figure 16 shows the re-plotted and previously unrecorded site locations.The results of the supplemental AIS work conducted at Sites 2496,4013, 15261, and 29271 is presented below.The remaining three omissions are relatively minor and can be adequately addressed during subsequent data recovery and preservation work.At Site 16131 a rough terrace feature LiI I AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 27 r7 5. Archaeological Fieldwork was not recorded;at Site 16147 the northern extension of the site was not recorded;and at Site 16151 a marine shell scatter was not recorded. Seasonal drainage Existing dirt roads 00,// Archaeological features Old Mahukona-Kawailiae(Jeep)Trail Trails Burial features in red JJ Bulldozed area •401 e� 1613 1-7 4012" 61 4011 C to j4Q0 7 016137 'I I*2"k C 161 413P 16136�R OP 6138 -B 1613 C Terrace not mentioned ;� � in Site 16131 desciiption 29271-C ,161Y ee br". dk* 4002 c 004 El 2498-A Peiroglyph/ Eg A '9 39heti 16A49 Il,.J� 00 Pacific Oceall n, F;,E F 24 161450 149p Marine shell scatter and alignment 216141 L not mentioned in Site 16147 description /:� 161!!616 N, 1 14 161440 Ff ---•F16143 16151 B L 16151 tii642 arine shell scatter not mentioned in Site 16157 description 0 40 80 L-- Scale in Meters Figure 16.Re-plotted site locations and previously unrecorded features(Site 4013 D;Site 15261 B and C;Site 29271 B). 28 AIS Update for TXM:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork SIHP SITE 2496 Sites 2496 and 2497 were originally recorded by Bonk(1968)as two single-feature sites four meters apart.During the PHRI inventory study(Graves and Franklin 1998), the two sites were combined and three additional features were described as comprising Site 2496 (the Site 2497 designation was dropped). Site 2496 is located entirely within the current project area.As Graves and Franklin(1998:A-20)describe: This site is on a ridge just east of Keawewai Gulch and it is bisected by the coastal jeep road. This complex consists of Feature A (enclosure), Feature B (C-shape), Feature C (terrace), Feature D (mound),and Feature E(midden deposit) [their map of the site is provided as Figures 17 and 18]. OP '7 7 Ar J 7- J t- L -7 r v ma 7 -7 —7- 2 77 7 -----_--_- Lil i5e "i 41 2- E, r 'E- 7 V J J 7 i-L -----------—------- Figure 17. Graves and Franklin(1998)map of Site 2496 page I of 2. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 1 ,North Kohala,Hawaii 29 5. Archaeological Fieldwork 21,a , r .� ------------ w i ., _ r,ErIZ .; s i Y _2 # E HH- Figure 18. Graves and Franklin(1998)map of Site 2496 page 2 30 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1',North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork Feature D Site 2496 Feature D (Figure 19) was further described as "a low flat stone mound [2.3 in by 1.4 in by 0.5 in]. . . constructed of subangular pahoehoe boulders 10-20 cm in diameter. . .roughly stacked 3 courses high. The platform is core filled with cobbles c. 0.10 in or less and decorated with coral."(Graves and Franklin 1998:A-20,italics added for emphasis).Despite their description,Graves and Franklin(1998)interpreted this feature to have functioned as an agricultural mound. ,�''✓9W3� t wa��' � ��'W��Tn ���, '��� ,��� r ����' ��d,�Ui4 ���hrr�i� r��l ��r4 �� � C�1i) All �Nf � �'��(�,�t��- ✓ ��"r�l�y,� ��' � ���� �'� � Pi���r la�r (x P��Y�,�r "� E��a! t r Vf�ur �y i:'rG' ' i � �' ! N / 31 �� J' i �yyv.��6 r� � i 7 silo' � � � C f;U,;� ✓; ''., ,,� "' � u i v. r� �� rr o �wi` T y'� ��✓ a z �,' �Pln a, � �� " � �r� ' W; (sF �il kls,"Sn~Pd ✓;/a" � r l f I tlr, ✓,m„�.�1�,d' `4Y rw o +� ✓ t ;n r r� 7✓m s l - 4✓ � � � x �, r yr ��r✓t� sJ rP � r . r Figure 19. SIHP Site 2496 Feature D,view to the northwest. The location of Feature D as shown on Figure 17 is not accurate thus the site was remapped during the current study so as to accurately depict the relationship of Feature D to the rest of the site (Figure 20). Feature D was also individually mapped (Figure 21) and not feeling comfortable with the agricultural functional interpretation, we excavated a test trench(TU-1)bisecting the feature in a north/south direction.Upon removal of the architectural rock layer,an intrusive pit was observed in the underlying soil. Continued excavation within this pit revealed the presence of a capstone below which was the articulated human skeletal remains of one individual. Upon discovery of the remains, DLNR-SHPD was contacted, the test unit was profiled (Figure 22) and refilled, and the platform reconstructed as closely matching the original specification as possible. As a result of the current study, SIHP Site 2496 Feature D is redescribed as a roughly rectangular platform(see Figure 12) measuring 3 meters by 2 meters with edges stacked 35 to 40 centimeters above the surrounding ground surface(see Figure 15).The platform is constructed of weathered angular basalt cobbles as large as 25 centimeters in diameter with a few waterworn cobbles and coral fragment on its surface. The platform was built over a grave pit containing the remains of a single individual. Given the absence of Historic Period material it is surmised that this feature dates to the Precontact Period. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 31 L! F 5. Archaeological Fieldwork (� 0 10 20 -- Scale in Meters N U arae Existing dirt road Fil I �J ❑ AO C D PE l-.l L.? Di Li U Pacific Ocean r_? i I ! Figure 20. SIHP Site 2496 schematic pian view. 32 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 131,North Kohala,Hawaii L P 5. Archaeological Fieldwork P 0 4.5 1 l`1 Scale in meters "V Coralcnrc incl l (30) (3`) aterVd�lrn Cobbles Figure 21.SW Site 2496 Feature D plan view. f IIU° t� P Layer _ 1 Not excavated ayec TI Not excavated 0 20 40 Layer T1l I Articulated human Scale in centimeters skeletal remains L] Layer I-Architectural laver composed of small to large sized cobbles.Coral and waterworn cobbles were also observed. Layer Il-Dark yellowish brown(10 YR 3I4)fine silt with small and medium sized cobbles.A depression at the top of the layer was observed with architectural cobbles filling it in. L J-1 Layer IIT-Dark yellowish brown(IOYR 4t4")fine silt with approximately S percent gravel content. Figure 22.SIHP Site 2496 Feature D TU-1 west wall profile. AIS Update for TMK.:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 33 L:! j 5. Archaeological Fieldwork I i SIHP SITE 4013 tr7 l Site 4013(Figure 23)was recorded by PERI(Graves and Franklin 1998)as a complex of three features:Feature A,a i low wall and modified outcrop used as an animal corral,Feature B,a series of discontinuous walls used as an animal pen, and Feature C, a burial platform.During the current study one additional feature was identified(Feature D an r overhang rock shelter) and Site 4013 was reinterpreted to be a habitation/burial complex. Site 4013 has overall site Lil dimensions of 25 meters by 50 meters and has been interpreted as dating from the PrecontacttEistoric Periods. I — — — Seasonal drainage U / --- Existing dirt roads ❑V' Archaeological features - ........ Trails F1 3 J' 41 Burial ' A Project area boundary #C `•t r.r,r 1 �2,�� i .' D { 113JJJ f � ' l 4 } � 1 t ' . { r' r` it i ! ,,..•�' L' t' i i 0 { 1, /• Scale in Meters Figure 23.SEIP Site 4013 schematic plan view. 34 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Ilawai`i 5. Archaeological Fieldwork Feature D The newly identified overhang rock shelter, Site 4013 Feature D,is located along the bedrock exposure that connects Features A and B (see Figure 23). This portion of the bedrock protrudes horizontally for about 1 meter, creating a shelter space that has been enhanced through the placement of numerous medium to large boulders(Figure 24). The floor of the shelter space is relatively level and free of stones. The effective useable interior space is 3 meters by 1 - meter with the ceiling height reaching a maximum of 50 centimeters (Figure 25). There was no cultural material observed on the surface of the shelter, and to test the accumulated soil a 50 centimeter by 1.5 meter test unit(TU-2) was excavated at the center of the overhang.TU-2 was excavated in 10 centimeter arbitrary levels until bedrock was reached at a maximum depth of 12 centimeters below the surrounding ground surface (Figure 26). The soil encountered in TU-2 was dark yellowish brown (10 3/3) silt. Cultural material recovered from the 1/8 inch screening of the excavated soil included 36.6 grams of marine shell and seven pieces (0.1 gram)of fish bone(Table 2).Based on its barricaded nature and the presence of faunal remains,Feature D is considered to have functioned as either a sleeping or working area. Yt s i� FY � ridiGw�o Y u .r Y,� lulu ! k 7 ' °qa ° �° w♦ w*' M ° v aur' ° Figure 24. SII P Site 4013 Feature I),view to the southeast. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 35 5. Archaeological Fieldwork to th"C "211.1tl7t'ei`,ti'tt;9f'he"dICITCr opeE'?'ing lledi-)ck iii _C ✓ �,.a.„ ` � ,l ,�^:.,. ,-..-d`� �/^� ii� '', y ✓,r �r- �. r Slab iron) bar1"ICidCle I E- _ k Soil floor f _ ff 11-2 Area Linder overhanty, - r 0 025 0.5 ( Scale in s ✓ ""61 � w.. ; �,.. rQ����uNtuirr�u^a�1n�71.�tex�B Bedrock Figure 25. SIHP Site 4013 Feature D plan view and profile. 36 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1 ,North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork 0 10 20 Scale m�ters P Fill Bedrock FIT 1__) t_� FIT —il F, F, 320°< > 1400 Fill . ....... ...._........................... ................ ..... ........ ................. ........ ....... ......... ..... ... ......... ......... ........ II Il t�II Level 1 il= Level 2 Il. Figure 26. SW Site 4013 Feature D TU-2 and overhang western profile. Table 2.Items recovered from SIHP Site 4013 Feature D TU-2. Acc. # Level Material Type/Species Count MNI Weight(g.) 2 1 Echinoderm Echinoidea 3 - 1.7 n, 3 1 Marine shell Nerita sp. 9 8 1.5 4 1 Marine shell Cellana sp. 2 2 15.9 5 1 Marine shell Drupa sp. 5 2 1.5 j 6 1 Marine shell Cypraea sp. 16 2 14.2 U 7 1 Fish bone unidentified 7 1 0.1 8 1 Reptile bone Gekkonidae 1 1 <0.1 9 1 Rodent bone Mus sp. 1 1 <0.1 U 10 1 Marine shell Mitridae 1 1 0.2 11 1 Marine shell unidentified 1 1 0.5 12 1 Nut Shell kukui 4 - 2.7 13 2 Marine shell Cellana sp. 2 1 0.3 14 2 Marine shell Nerita sp. 2 2 0.8 jI t_J Ut AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 37 F- LI u 5. Archaeological Fieldwork S11HP SITE 15261 Site 15261 was recorded by PM (Graves and Franklin 1998) as a discontinuous maukalmakai trail segment that LJ begins c. 10 meters south of the Akone-Pule Highway and extends seaward along the eastern side of a shallow gully for c. 150 meters(see Figure 9).The route of the trail is marked mostly by a worn path(0.52-0.68 meters wide),but it also has a short section(2.5 meters long)where small boulders line its northern edge.PHRI notes that destruction ( � along the trial has been caused mostly by erosion,but that it has also been impacted by bulldozing.This roughly 108- meter-long trail segment (Feature A) was relocated and mapped during the current inventory survey fieldwork, as were two additional trail segments that measure roughly 50 meters long and roughly 180 meters long(Features B and C,respectively), located to the north of the first(see Figure 16).All three trail segments are situated entirely within the current project area and do not extend beyond the project area boundaries. A review of Historic cartographic resources for the general project area suggests that all three segments are likely separate branches of the same i- maukalmakai trail alignment. The trail segments may represent subsequent alignments that were created as earlier I alignments were abandoned due to deterioration(from erosion)or changing land use and transportation needs during the Historic Period;or they may have seen contemporaneous use(at least by foot or horse)depending on the traveler's coastal destination or starting point.Each of the three segments of Site 15261 identified within the project area exhibits varying levels of deterioration,and each is separated from the next by an intervening gulch, making either scenario possible. Graves and Franklin (1998), in their analysis of site and feature types recorded during the original AIS, interpret Site 15261 (the only trail segment they identified)as the remains of an"ancient trail"shown on a 1935 Tax Map Key(the alignment depicted on that map appears to be the same as the"ancient trail"alignment depicted on the 1931 map submitted with Land Court Application 1043,and was likely copied directly from that older map;see Figure 13). However, an overlay of the "ancient trail" alignment from the 1931 map onto the current project area map indicates that the Site 15261 trail segment recorded by PHRI is actually located well to the south of the trail shown on that map. Historic maps from 1859, 1913, 1931,and 1956 show various maukalmakai trail alignments extending across the current project area(Figure 27).The trails follow two general routes(a pre-1913 route and a past-1931 route)that are both distinct from the route of Site 15261 reported by Graves and Franklin(1998). The 1859 map of Kahuali`ili`i prepared by S.C.Wiltse(see Figure 11)shows a Road to Macy and Vida's Ranch that extends from the coast within the current project area at Waiakailio Landing inland to roughly 1,600 feet above sea level before exiting the southern boundary of the ahupua`a(Trail 1 in Figure 27). The 1913 U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle(see Figure 13) shows a similar maukalmakai trail alignment(labeled"Beach Trail")extending from the coast within the current project area to roughly 1,100 feet above sea level where it meets the Kawaihae-Puu Hue Trail near the southern ahupua`a boundary and the junction with the Kawaihae-Kahua Trail(Trail 8 in Figure 27).As discussed above,the 1931 map submitted with Land Court Application 1043(see Figure 13)also shows a maukalmakai trail(labeledt`Ancient Trail")extending Ell inland from the coast within the current project area(Trail 7 in Figure 27). The makai-most portion of this trail is depicted to the north of the trail alignments shown on the earlier maps(adjacent to a fence line),but mauka of the project area (beginning at an elevation of roughly 150 feet above sea level) the trail appears to follow the same ' (� 3 combined routes as the Beach and Kawaihae-Kahua trails that are depicted on the 1913 U.S.G.S.(see Figure 27).The 1. 1956 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle shows a maukalmakai trail alignment extending inland from the coast within the current project area(labeled"Beach Trail") that is similar to that shown on the 1931 map (Trail 11 in Figure 27). Mauka of the project area,however,beginning at an elevation of roughly 150 feet above sea level,the trail turns to the east (eventually becomes a road) and follows a different route than shown on any of the earlier maps to the l` Kawaihae-Puu Hue Trail before continuing as the Kawaihae-Kahua Trail. As shown in Figure 27,mauka of the current project area,the trail alignments depicted on the Historic maps(with the exception of the Beach Trail shown on the 1956 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle)all follow similar, intertwined L routes to the Kawaihae-Puu Hue Trail(Trail 6 in Figure 27)where they meet with the Kawaihae-Kahua Trail(Trail 7 in Figure 27) and continue to the Government Road (Trail 4 in Figure 27). It is posited that these trails actually represent shifting alignments of the same maukalmakai trail route,and that the branches discovered with the current C project area are functionally,if not temporally,related.For this reason the branch of Site 15261 originally recorded by PHRI(the southernmost branch;see description above)has been designated Feature A,the newly recorded branch shown on pre-1913 maps(the middle branch)has been designated Feature B, and the other newly recorded branch , shown on post-1931 maps(the northern branch)has been designated Feature C.The newly recorded Features B and IL C are described below. i ' 38 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii j ' 5. Archaeological Fieldwork Trail shown on: 1859 map of Kahu5li'ili'i 1903 Hawaii Registered Map No.2231 ----- 1913 U.S.G.S.Kawaihae quadrangle ----- 1931 Land Court Application 1043 map 1956 U.S.G.S,Kawaihae quadrangle 2 Multiple maps Fi true 7 Kilometers 6 Labels assigned to trails on historic maps(corresponding map date) I-Road to Macy and Vida's Ranch(1859) 2-Trail from Beadles to Kawaihae(1859) 3-Old Road from Kohala Point(1859) 4-Government(Aupunui)Road(1859, 1903, 1913, 1931,and 1956) 5-Ala I valSea Coast Trail from Mabukona(1903) 6-Kawaihae-Puu Hue Trail(1903, 1913, 1931,and 1956) 1 7-Unlabeled trail(1903) Kawaihae-Kahua Trail(1913, 1956) Ancient Trail(193 1) 8-Beach Trail(1913) A Project area 9-Ala loa/Maliukona-Kawaihae Trail(1931 and 1956) 10-Ancient Trail(193 1) 11-Beach Trail(1956) Figure 27.Trail alignments shown on Historic maps in Kahudli'ili'i Ahupuaa. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11t,North Kohala,Hawaii 39 5. Archaeological Fieldwork Feature B Site 15261 Feature B is a trail segment that extends mauka from Site 16133 for roughly 50 meters (see Figure 16). The trail begins c. 20 meters south of Site 4011 at a low spot in a bedrock ledge that partially encloses the northern edge of Site 16133.Both edges of the bedrock ledge at this location,for a distance of roughly 10 meters,constricting from more than 5 meters apart at the southwestern end of the gap in the bedrock ledge to roughly 2 meters apart at the northeastern end,have been modified with short sections of stacked cobbles(Figure 28).The discontinuous stacking along the northwestern edge of the low spot is wholly dependent on the bedrock ledge for support(Figure 29),while sections of the stacking along the southeast edge are free standing and on top of the bedrock (Figure 30). The gap between the bedrock edges allows for the easiest maukalmakai access at Site 16133,where a well,a windmill(erected in 1931), and a cattle pen are located. Beyond the bedrock low spot Feature B seems to continue in a northeasterly direction for about 40 meters (and perhaps as far as 65 meters). A discontinuous alignment of small boulders on an eroded bedrock slope of loose cobbles and boulders faintly marks this section of Feature B (Figure 31).Beginning at a distance of roughly 65 meters from the southwestern end of Feature B,nearly the entire ground surface between the two gullies that bound the trail route and separate it from Feature A(to the south)and Feature C(to the north),up to the highway alignment,has been disturbed by bulldozing and no further traces of Site 15261 Feature B are discernable. This trail section appears to match the trail alignments shown of the 1859 and 1913 maps(see Figure 27);it is labeled "Road to Macy and Vida's Manch"in 1859 and"Beach Trail"in 1913. " q w" 7 n t n 3 w G p ' r y � &e F 4 � I r r y I 1 Figure 28. SIHP Site 15261 Feature B,view to the northeast. 40 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua l',North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork S, .y u r i q : . u V, � u � ns� �` � r��✓��rr w <�A rp a „err x w s W 7 r Figure 29. SIHP Site 15261 Feature B,view to the north. f r fG J c � oaf rs ➢s sr�� q,�uarr+.e� y. � I rm � s e V� A aqj 6 p' ✓ o i a l i r a>" Figure 30. SIHP Site 15261 Feature B,view to the south. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 41 5. Archaeological Fieldwork lDY a fry '�� •• __ Fin J f03yq d � � (F+l ,�,d�4i r1��� �r �I ^✓� � A � �1e yN p � ✓ II of ��' /0 d '�a�y,,�iiJa�,;�y � �id�o f�,2✓ ��W x�7 .��" �V� N 'k"� �, `, �r '� ��Iri�����,��`/ a+ „� -- '„ "✓ �w''�!c „w a;, . ;�cd' "$'vr,� tr � � � /�. ;`��,. � � ����, �; Figure 31. SIHP Site 15261 Feature B,view to the southwest. Future C Site 15261 Feature C is a roughly 180-meter-long segment of a mauka/makai trail that is depicted on maps prepared in both 1931 and 1956 (see Figure 27). On the 1931 map the trail (labeled "Ancient Trail") is shown adjacent to a fence line that extends to the coast. An overlay of that map onto the current project area map indicates that portions of the fence line are still extant on the property and that the mauka portion of the trail is a 4WD access road that extends southwest from a gate at the highway (Figure 32). Approximately 130 meters from the highway this mauka/makai road section Ts into a lateral road that once crossed the gullies on either side of Feature C,but has been blocked in both directions. The trail shown at this location on the 1931 map continues in a straight line makai of the T-intersection to the costal alignment of the Ala loa/Kawaihae-Mahukona Trail (Site 29271). On the eroded cobble and boulder slope southwest of the road intersection(Figure 33)a possible older segment of Feature C was identified. This section, which has the appearance of an old, overgrown bulldozed road,is roughly 5 meters long by 2.5 meters wide with low cobble berms along either edge (Figure 34). No further sections of Feature C were identified on the loose cobble slope. SIHP SITE 29271 Site 29271 is a coastal trail depicted on the 1903 Hawaii Reg. Map 2231 as the Ala loa and "sea coast trail from Mahukona"(see Figure 13),the 1931 Land Court Application Map 1043 as the Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail(see Figure 15), and the 1956 U.S.G.S. Kawaihae quadrangle as an unnamed trail (see Figure 16) that extended parallel to the coast between Kawaihae to the south and Mahukona to the north. The trail alignment is not shown on U.S.G.S.maps after 1956. The SIHP site designation 29271 was first assigned to this trail by Clark and Rechtman(2010). For the most part this historic property is not discernable in its original state across the current study area and beyond, as it has been superseded by a series of bulldozed Jeep roads constructed between the 1940s and 1970s. Two slightly different routes of the trail are shown on the Historic maps reviewed for this study(see Figure 27). On the 1903 map the trail alignment stays close to the shore, but on the 1931 and 1956 maps the trail turns inland near the southern boundary of the current project area where it crosses Keawewai Gulch.It is likely that the two alignments represent a shift from an earlier coastal walking trail to a later Jeep road. 42 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1',North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork a i n" I � I I � I i I n N Figure 32. SIHP Site 15261 Feature C,view to the northeast. i,r�r ✓f,�!,,,.,, ,,;r,�;%%�r� /,l/1',/ �i //I i i J iii ii x, '� Figure 33. SHIP Site 15261 Feature C,view to the southwest. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1�,North Kohala,Hawaii 43 5. Archaeological Fieldwork V — — — r # tl , Ir ,J `: ✓• ,w� 7� mT r l r G �d 9Yr' Y W�Y d nr.y °I u N NaYf 4 # n i r I r r/ e 1«? y� p x r x mNV '+ r,•, W"#«. "r y r. ,d �r�µ e5 ,r l✓ I ,«r, V r`� �a� ',.�,� °F�,#} ,(t M#,�r«.+'�` m fi,#' xmd ^#r"vr'r w, y�w,, �I ro r�a��� �r,� ,{ �', ���� rr, rY�%rrh a' �" �'✓",� �r,t� �" '" +� f Y'6jrr '�a�f� � . G d 1, I . # J9} � � %' � 5`•' a '�'�f�it r �r lrNfi kid; ✓� nd �� ro � f r` �'� f t r w� r s "!d" ^, a �.x k�` & �f�' dmu' f �x1X,;"6� 2' z `+#«.. #N #'N,#r ✓rh.m k,Wm� frll f{C J d' " ,�';(C. lr`"' �`r r'xlf/xani4wi; � ,wfw E" x �'d� � r/, ` " JN � ,wr,Yr � mx;�<, d�� �rm`rr'« � ay* r"'xJ�gm,w.+r rP.e�« '";�"�#rf M1 "'xYr✓F i �Y ' Yx ,� v ' 7�w h W 4� # v ✓N° Y at m tUl/ e m r,w' � v d✓ Figure 34. SIHP Site 15261 Feature C,view to the southwest. r- Graves and Franklin(1998:34)discuss,that in response to comments regarding PHRI's failure to mention the Ala loa or other mauka/makai trails identified on maps of the area in earlier drafts of their AIS report,PHRI had conducted a"pedestrian inspection to determine if any portion of a jeep road that crosses the coastal portion of the project area could be identified as the ala loa trail."The inspection included walking the length of the road to search for evidence of constructed causeways or curbing that might still be present,but none was found, and they concluded that"if the road did indeed follow the original path of the trail,all traces of it have been obliterated by long-term use and alteration (Graves and Franklin 1998:34). For the purposes of the current supplemental AIS the Ala loa/Ivlahukona-Kawaihae - Trail alignments from the Historic maps were overlayed on the newly prepared project area map to examine their locations relative to the existing Jeep roads on the property. The overlays indicate that the trail alignments shown on I` the 1931 and 1956 correspond to bulldozed Jeep road alignments across the entire property, but that the alignment depicted on the 1903 map,while it corresponds to Jeep roads for much of its length,is shown makai of the bulldozed Jeep road at the southern end of the project area where it crosses Keawewai Gulch. Further pedestrian inspection of the area between and the southern parcel boundary revealed two possible trail remnants, one makai of the Jeep road near the southern property boundary, and another mauka of the Jeep road near SIHP Site 4000. For descriptive purposes the Jeep road(the later alignment of the Ala loa) is discussed below as Feature A of Site 29271,while the remnants of the earlier pedestrian alignments are discussed as Features B and C(see Figure 17).A petroglyph found in Keawewai Gulch near where Features A and B meet is described below with Feature A. Feature A Site 29271 Feature A is the alignment of the Ala loa/Ivlahukona-Kawaihae Trail shown on the 1931 and 1956 maps (see Figure 17).This alignment(Figure 35)consists wholly of bulldozed sections of Jeep road that were likely created between the 1940s and 1970s, superseding the earlier pedestrian trail alignment. Some sections of this alignment are still accessible to 4WD vehicles(Figure 36),but others are overgrown and cannot be driven on(Figure 37).The Jeep road is generally 2.5 to 3.0 meters wide and is badly eroded in some sections, and if intact would extend roughly 680 meters across the entire project area and beyond the project area boundaries to the northwest and southeast. At the northern end of the property the road has been blocked by bulldozed berms at two locations to prevent vehicular access. On the mauka side of the road as it crosses Keawewai Gulch there is a single anthropomorphic petroglyph etched into an eroded vertical surface(Figures 38 and 39).This image measures 25 centimeters tall by 13 centimeters wide, and its appearance and nature of execution(etching) it appears to be on the more recent end of the spectrum of such traditional practices. 44 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii i Archaeological Fieldwork /§ . . : . yx . 2a � » ) Figure 35.Aerial view(from Google Earth)showing the locations of gHPSi 29271 Features A,B, and AIS Update for Tey(3)5-9-01:008,<±«!\North x U!&x w m ss 5. Archaeological Fieldwork ' uW �v ta7 r h. .w M r I � J� 4 Figure 36. SIHP Site 29271 Feature A,view to the northwest. V sd 4 6 i A s� n k� i 1H u � � w r r�dr� a 1A r ty 4i5k !i "u rw rr x411, tryrli6 Figure 37. SIHP Site 29271 Feature A,view to the south. 46 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii 5. Archaeological Fieldwork ��1��/� r % ✓1� �/�Id✓ � ��� '�/r� ✓ate/ ✓`� �y�%%�� /' 3�✓ /� �ry� � r '" 1,r� �j`lf'"r% rf l `/n/r�l F ly�r�0//yh ��/ � � � � �I aF'�,�� �p '� �l�Yir�, /:y✓t�,, it '; si� br, ��„ r i� ✓litfi�y��ii /t ' �' G¢1/�/rN"r/��+//111�� r����� ���� fr I i w✓ i � � Figure 38.Triangle body anthropomorphic petroglyph etched on exfoliating vertical surface along the route of Site 29271 Feature A in Keawewai Gulch. i 6�Ur pi � 'Ymi ild ori^ ��'�;✓'��,'��al,,;�„ , ✓ m/75 j w'Y' W P Figure 39.Outline detail of Site 29271 Feature A petroglyph. Feature B Site 29271 Feature B consists of a short, remnant section of the Ala loa/Mahukona-Kawaihae Trail that roughly matches its location as shown on the 1903 Hawaii Reg.Map 2231 (see Figure 13).This faint trail alignment extends for roughly 130 meters in a northwesterly/southeasterly direction,25 to 50 meters inland of the coast,near the southern boundary of project area(see Figure 17). The trail is discontinuous and very rough,but is marked in a few locations by short alignments of small boulders and cobbles along one edge (Figure 40). The pathway is littered with loose cobbles,but may have been 0.5 to 0.75 meters wide when in use. A 30 meter section of the trail, 25 meters from its northwestern end, has been erased by bulldozing. The projected route of the trail, while it could not be positively identified at Keawewai Gulch,suggests that it crossed that steep sided land form at the only easily accessible location makai of the existing Jeep road(Feature A).A section of this trail is observable crossing a smaller gulch to the south (Figure 41)were it also crosses at the most accessible location below the Jeep road.While Feature B once continued to both the northwest and southeast of the currently recorded section, no further physical remnants of the alignment were identified. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 47 5. Archaeological Fieldwork nr '11ii g.M�U�sy�d �x� 1� �� x!Ir��1 Y%°° � ��k ! x ✓x�wi 1 a� r Y 'I"R ✓Gx�;�.��g" yx ;ry ��r�i,yf.�r� �Cr""`xr^3 '�,w°" �� ��d x ,aar? a VIAW n w �xx rx�l� �r m' �r�mxrt� �6�4a fin � � dil a � lttVot it rw '��'��r��" �� ' i°�� / � `�� � t ° �x ht� fid,^ , �� ��• ��, ' r Figure 40. SIHP Site 29271 Feature B,view to the southeast. dM ^� , A K ft b Y� d /p�Psi �✓✓�, '�"�,� „mag.a'�.�: ,`�n�",L �"" ,.` ."' �r„' r,�, ��,,� :,,e ,9'�. Figure 41. SIHP Site 29271 Feature B at unnamed gulch,view to the southwest. 48 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 111,North Kohala,Hawaii f ! 5. Archaeological Fieldwork Feature C Site 29271 Feature C consists of a possible, short remnant section of the ala loa trail that seems to correspond with the location shown on a 1931 map (see Figure 16),the more mauka placement of the trail. This section of trail is a worn pathway that measures between 50 and 75 centimeters wide that appears to have been cleared of larger rocks, some of which line the edge of the trail. This segment of trail is traceable for roughly 50 meters curving mauka then makai as it deviates from the Jeep road portion of the site(Feature A)just to the north of Keawewai Gulch(see Figure 35).This alignment appears to skirt the Site 4000/4004 burial complex.Feature C is currently bisected by a recent dirt road that extends in a mauka/makai direction between the highway and the shoreline. The section of trail on the southern side of the dirt road(Figure 42)measures roughly 20 meters;and the section on the northern side(Figure 43) extends for roughly 30 meters.Feature C seems to represent the location ala loa just prior to the construction of the 1940s Jeep road. fn�P' I� 1� n, � ✓1r � r p �mmir� k i l i c r�k�- i➢l;' Figure 42. SIHP Site 29271 Feature C south of mauka/makai dirt road,view to the north. AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1s',North Kohala,Hawaii 49 E_' 5. Archaeological Fieldwork y � 6 , Figure 43.SIHP Site 29271 Feature C north of mauka/makai dirt road,view to the southeast. 50 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1',North Kohala,Hawaii 6. Significance Evaluation and Treatment Recommendations 6. SIGNIFICANCE EVALUATION AND TREATMENT RECOMMENDATIONS All forty archaeological sites that exist within the current study parcel have already been assessed for their significance based on criteria established and promoted by the DLNR-SHPD and contained in the Hawaii Administrative Rules 13§13-284-6. The significance of these sites is presented below. The updated significance evaluations should be considered as preliminary until DLNR-SHPD provides concurrence.For resources to be significant they must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association and meet one or more of the following criteria: a Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; c Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type,period,or method of construction;represent the work of a master;or possess high artistic value; d Have yielded,or is likely to yield,information important for research on prehistory or history; e Have an important value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with cultural practices once carried out,or still carried out,at the property or due to associations with traditional beliefs,events or oral accounts—these associations being important to the group's history and cultural identity. Table 3 below presents a summary of the significance evaluation for all forty sites followed by a discussion. As a result of the current study the original significance evaluation(Graves and Franklin 1998)and the subsequent DLNR-SHPB determination(DOC NO.:9805PM21)has been modified for five of the previously recorded sites.Four of these(Sites 4000,4010, 16132,and 16138)were not considered to be significant in the original study;however,all of these sites are part of a relatively intact archaeological landscape that documents evolving land use from Precontact times to the late Historic Period.As such, all four of these sites are now considered to be significant under Criterion d for their information content.Further, Site 2496 was originally determined to be significant solely under Criterion d;however,as this site is now known to contain a burial it is now also be considered significant under Criterion e. Tulle 3. Summery of site si�nicanee< SIHP No, Site Type Temporal Association Significance 2496 Habitation/Burial Precontact d,e 2498Habitation/Ceremonial Precontact c,d,e 2499 Habitation Precontact/Historic c,d 4000 Wall Precontact/Historic d 4002 Rock mound Precontact d 4003 Habitation Precontact/Historic d 4004 Burial Precontact/Historic d,e 4005 Habitation Precontact/Historic c,d 4010 Animal Enclosure Historic d 4011 Habitation Precontact/Historic d 4012 Habitation Precontact/Historic d 4013 Habitation/Burial Precontact/Historic d,e 4015 Habitation Precontact d 15261 Trail Precontact/Historic d,e 16131 Habitation Precontact/Historic d 16132 Wall Historic d 16133 Well/Reservoir Historic d 16134 Enclosure Historic d 16135 Wall Precontact d 16136 Habitation Precontact d 16137 Rock mound Precontact d continued on next page AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 1s',North Kohala,Hawaii 51 t_: I 6. Significance Evaluation and Treatment Recommendations Table 3, Continued. - SIHP No. Site Type Temporal Association S gnificanre 16138 Platform and cairn Precontact d 16139 Habitation Precontact d 16140 Habitation Precontact d 16141 Habitation Precontact d 16142 Habitation Precontact d 16143 Habitation Precontact d 16144 Habitation Precontact d 16145 Habitation Precontact d 16146 Habitation Precontact d 16147 Habitation Precontact d 16148 Habitation/Burial Precontact d,e 16149 Habitation Precontact d 16150 Habitation Precontact d 16151 Habitation Precontact d 16162 Burial Precontact d,e 16163 Habitation Precontact d 16164 Habitation Precontact d ` 16167 Agricultural Terrace Precontact/Historic d 29271 Trail Precontact/Historic d,e Given the current development proposal (a nine lot subdivision) for the study property (see Figures 8 and 10), site treatments are reconsidered and the existing preservation and burial treatment plans require revision. Table 4 shows the prior approved treatments and the proposed treatment recommendations. As can be seen in this table,the proposed treatment for several of the sites reverts back to that as was approved in the earlier AIS. The revised treatments were based on a very limited land use(one single-family residence)of the 37.8 acre parcel,and the current proposed treatments take into consideration the current proposed development plan.No further work continues to be the proposed treatment for two sites (Sites 16132 and 16136);both of these were substantially documented during either the original AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) or the subsequent burial testing(PHRI 2005). Data recovery has ` already been completed for Site 4015 (O'Hare and Goodfellow 1999),thus no further work is recommended for this site. Two of the sites (Sites 4010 and 16138) that were earlier approved for no further work are now recommended for data recovery prior to their destruction; and one site (Site 4000) that was approved for no further work is now recommended for preservation as it appears to be a part of the Site 4004 burial complex. The four previously identified burial sites (Sites 4004, 4013, 16148, and 16162) shall continue to be preserved, however the burial treatment plan(PHRI 2000a)should be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use and the newly identified burial site(Site 2496 Feature D) added to the plan.As stated in the burial treatment plan: While it is the intent of the owner to develop only the western portion of the project area, and to leave the larger eastern portion in its present undeveloped condition, it is recognized that the possibility of changes in intended property use by the current or any subsequent owner may arise in the future.Therefore,any proposed future changes in land use for the eastern portion of the property will require the owner to return to the HIBC for possible reconsideration of the adequacy of the long-term preservation measures for the burial sites as proposed in this BTP.(PHRI 2000x:15) Data recovery is now recommended for sixteen sites (4002, 4003, 4010, 4012, 16135, 16137, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146, 16150, 16151, 16164, 16167)plus portions of two additional sites(Sites 2496 and 4013) that also contain preserved burial features.All of these sites were accepted for data recovery in the prior AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998)with the exception of Sites 4010 and 16138,which were accepted for no further work.It is believed that these two sites still retain information that could be recovered and aid in developing a specific chronology of the project area land use history.Pursuant to HAR 13§13-278,a plan addressing the data recovery of these eighteen sites should be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and acceptance. Preservation is now recommended for sixteen sites(2498,2499,4000,4005,4011, 15261, 16131, 16133, 16134, 16139, 16142, 16145, 16147, 16149, 16163 and 2927 1)two of which(Sites 4000 and 1526 1)were approved for no further work as a result of the original AIS (Graves and Franklin 1998) and another (Site 29271), which was not identified at that time.A new preservation plan that addresses these sixteen sites should be prepared and submitted to DLNR-SHPD for review and acceptance in compliance with HAR 13§13-277. 52 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 6. Significance Evaluation and Treatment Recommendations Table 4. Previouroved and current proposed treatment recommendations. .SIHPNo. Treatment in AIS* Revised Treatment** Proposed Treatment 2496 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 2498 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation Preservation 2499 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation Preservation. 4000 No Further Work No Further Work Preservation 4002 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 4003 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery', 4004 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation Burial Preservation 4005 Data Recovery/Preservation Preservation Preservation 4010 No Further Work No Further Work Data Recovery 4011 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 4012 Data Recovery Preservation . Data Recovery 4013 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 4015 Data Recovery Completed Data Recovery Completed No Further Work 15261 No Further Work No Further Work Preservation- 16131 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16132 No Further Work No Further Work No Further Work 16133 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16134 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16135 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16136 No Further Work No Further Work No Further:Work 16137 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16138 No Further Work No Further Work Data Recovery 16139 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16140 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16141 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16142 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery, 16144 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16145 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation Data:Recovery 16147 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation,,,, 16148 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation Burial Preservation , 16149 Data Recovery Preservation Preservation 16150 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16151 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery 16162 Burial Preservation Burial Preservation Burial Preservation 16163 Data Recovery Preservation Preservat on:, 16164 Data Recovery Preservation I Data Recovery 16167 Data Recovery Preservation Data Recovery. 29271 Not documented Not documented Preservation *Derived from Graves and Franklin(1998);**PHRI(2000b);PF-IRI(2005). AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahua 11,North Kohala,Hawaii 53 References Cited REFERENCES CITED Allen,M. LJ1 1985a Limited Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey Kahua Shores Coastal Parcel: Kahua 1, North Kohala,Island of Hawaii(THK:3-5-9-01:8).PHRI Report 74-031883.Prepared for Kahua Shores, 7i Ltd. U, 1985b Limited Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey Kahua Shores Coastal Parcel: Kahua 1-2 and Waika,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii(THK:3-5-9-01:8). PHRI Report 76-030183.Prepared for Kahua Shores,Ltd. Apple,R. 1965 Hawaiian Archaeology: Trails.B.P.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. U, Barrera,W. 1971 Anaehoomalu: A Hawaiian Oasis. Preliminary Report of Salvage Research in South Kohala, Hawaii. Pacific Anthropological Records No. 15. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Beckwith,M. 1976 Hawaiian Mythology.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. Bellwood,P. 1978 The Polynesians:Prehistory ofan Island People. Thames and Hudson,Ltd.,London. Bonk,W. Ell, 1968 An Archaeological Survey of a Coastal Tract in North and South Kohala,Hawaii.Report Prepared for the Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks,Hawaii. Burgett,B.,and P.Rosendahl E 1993 Summary of Archaeological Inventory Surveys,Kapaanui Agricultural Subdivision and Mahukona Property, Lands of Kapaanui, Kau, Kamano, Mahukona I st and 2nd, Hihiu, and Kaoma, North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii.(TMK:3-5-7-02:11 and TNM:3-5-7-03:1-3,10-14,16-18).PERI Report 743-020993.Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii,Inc. F1 Clark,M.,and R.Rechtman 2010 An Archaeological Inventory survey of TMK:3-5-8-01:15 and 3-5-9-03:03 Puaiki and Ki'iokalani ahupuaa, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0674. Li Prepared for Ponoholo Ranch. F' Corbin,A. )L-j 2000 Archaeological Data Recovery at Kohala Makai-I Project Area, Land of Waika, North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii(TMK:5-9-01:006).PHRI Report No.2034-080100 Prepared for Kohala Waterfront Joint Venture. 2004 Archaeological Mitigation Plan KahuA Makai Project,Lands of Kahud 2'and Waika,North Kohala District, Hawaii Island (TNM:3-5-9-01:07). PHRI Report 2284-042104 Prepared for P-Ohana Makia/K-Ohana Makai. Cordy,R.,J.Tainter,R.Renger,and R.Hitchcock 1991 An Ahupua'a Study: The 1971 Archaeological Work at Kaloko Ahupuaa,North Kona,Island of Hawaii. Western Archaeological and Conservation Center Publications in Anthropology 58. Prepared for the National Park Service,U.S.Department of the Interior. 54 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud ',North Kohala,Hawaii L References Cited Doyle,E. 1953 Makua Laiana: the Story of Lorenzo Lyons. Compiled from manuscript journals 1832-1886. Honolulu Star Bulletin. Dunn,A.,and P.Rosendahl 1989 Archaeological Inventory Survey,Kapaanui Agricultural Subdivision,Lands of Kapaanui and Kou, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. PBRI Report 568-100289. Prepared for Ahualoa Development,Inc. Ellis,W. 1963 Journal of William Ellis: A Narrative of an 1823 Tour Through Hawaii. Mutual Publishing Company,Honolulu. Fornander,A. 1969 An Account of the Polynesian Race:Its Origin and Migrations.Tokyo:Charles E.Tuttle Co.,Inc. Graves,D.,and L.Franklin 1998 Archaeological Inventory Survey,Kahud Makai/Kahud Shores Coastal Parcels,Lands of Kahud I and 2 and Waika, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK: 3-5-9-01:7,8). PHRI Report 1024-033198.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii Company. Griffin,P.,T.Riley,P.Rosendahl,and H.Tuggle 1971 Archaeology of Halawa. and Lapakahi: Windward Valley and Leeward Slope. New Zealand Archaeological Association Newsletter 14(3):101-112. Hammatt,H.,and D.Borthwick 1986 Archaeological Survey and Excavations at Kohala Ranch,North Kohala,Hawaii.Cultural Services Hawaii Report Prepared for Kohala Ranch. 1987 Archaeological Reconnaissance of 1,288 Acres for a Proposed Residential Community, Kohala Ranch,North Kohala,Hawaii Island.Cultural Services Hawaii Report.Prepared for Kohala Ranch. 1990 Archaeological Reconnaissance of Gulch Areas within 1,314 Acres for a Proposed Residential Community,Kohala Ranch,North Kohala,Hawaii. Cultural Services Hawaii Report.Prepared for Department of Land and Natural Resources. Handy,E. S.C.,and E.G.Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Their Life, Lore, and Environment. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233,Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Henke,L. 1929 A Survey of Livestock in Hawaii.Research Publication No. 5.University of Hawaii,Honolulu. Hommon,R. 1976 The Formation of Primitive States in Pre-Contact Hawaii. Ph.D. Dissertation (Anthropology), University of Arizona,Tucson.University Microfilms,Inc.,Ann Arbor,Michigan. 1986 Social Evolution in Ancient Hawaii. IN Kirch, P.V. (ed.), Island Societies: Archaeological Approaches to Evolution and Trans-formation:55-88.Cambridge:University Press. Karnakau,S. 1964 Ka Poe Kahiko:The People of Old.B.P.Bishop Museum Special Publication 51.Bishop Museum L Press,Honolulu. F-1 I � U, AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud Is',North Kohala,Hawaii 55 References Cited Kamakau,S. 1976 The Works of the People of Old, Na hana a ka Poe Kahiko. B.P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 61.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. 1991 Tales and Traditions of the People of Old.Honolulu:Bishop Museum Press. 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii.The Kamehameha Schools Press,Honolulu(revised edition). Kent,N. r7l 1983 Hawaii:Islands Under the Influence.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. LJI Kirch,P. 1984 The Evolution of the Polynesian Chiefdoms.Cambridge University Press,New York. 1985 Feathered-Gods and Fishhooks: An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. 1990 Monumental Architecture and Power in Polynesian Chiefdoms: A Comparison of Tonga and Hawaii.World Archaeology 22(2). 2011 When did the Polynesians Settle Hawaii? A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer.Hawaiian Archaeology Vol. 12:3-26. KTF(Kohala Task Force) 1975 Kohala:A Candid View.Report of the Kohala Task Force[March]. Kubo,L.,and P.Rosendahl 2003 Burial Treatment Plan Sites 50-10-05-2491 (Feature B)and 50-10-05-16130(Features A and B)at Kohala Bay Estates,Land of Kahud I and 2,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii(TMK:3-5-9- 01:7). PHU Report 2283-101603. Prepared for P-Ohana Makai/K-Ghana Makai, Kamuela, Hawaii. Kuykendall,R.,and A.Day 1976 Hawaii: A History From Polynesian Kingdom to American Statehood. Prentice-Hall, Inc., Englewood Cliffs. Langlas,C. F11 1994 Pu'u of Mauka Kawaihae and Kalali Ahupua'a, District Kohala, Hawaii Island: Report of an Investigation of the Hawaiian Cultural Significance of Candidate Sites for the Katnuela Area (Hawai'i) NEXRAD Installation. Part 1: Candidates Sites for the NEXRAD Installation: Ethnographic Background and Site Assessment.Prepared for SRI International. Loubser,J.,and R.Rechtman 2007 Archaeological Data Recovery Investigation at SIHP Sites 2492, 16177, 16122,2494, 16129,2485, and 16154, within Site Complex 50-10-05-4157, TMK: 3-5-9-017:001-007, Kaltua 2 and Waika ahupuaa, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0400. Prepared for Kohala Kai LLC. Malo,D. 1951 Hawaiian Antiquities.Bishop Museum Press,Honolulu. Maly,K. 2000 Historical Background. In Archaeological Inventory Survey of the Coastal Portion of Kaiholena Ahupua'a, North Kohala, Hawaii pp. 23-66. by T. S. Dye and K. Maly. International Archaeological Research Institute,Inc.Report Prepared for Pohaku Kea,LCC.,Honolulu. 56 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 111,North Kohala,Hawaii P References Cited Newman,T. 1970 Hawaiian Fishing and Farming on the Island of Hawaii in AD 1778.Department of Land and Natural Resources,Division of State Parks,Honolulu. L9 OCA 2000 Paniolo Hall of Oral History Interviews.Oahu Cattlemen's Association,Ewa Beach. O'Hare,C.,and S.Goodfellow 1999 Archaeological Mitigation Program, Data Recovery Excavations, Site 50-10-05-4015, Kahud Makai/Kahud Shores Coastal Parcels, Land of Kahud 1,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii (TMK:5-9-01:7,8).PERI Report 1572-081799.Prepared for Gentry Hawaii,Ltd. Oliver,D. 1961 The Pacific Islands.University of Hawaii Press,Honolulu. L9 Off,M. 2003 Cultural Impact Assessment Kahua Ranch DAGS Rainbow Tower&Facilities Pu'u Waiakanonula, Kahua Ranch,Ahupua'a of Kahuali'ili'i,District of Kohala,Hawaii Island,Hawaii.Prepared for U Haun&Associates. PHRI 2000a Burial Treatment Plan,Kohala LLC Residential Compound Project.Land of Kahua 1,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5-9-01:8). PHRI Report 2003-041100. Prepared for Gentry- Pacific,Limited. 2000b Site Preservation Plan,Kohala LLC Residential Compound Project.Land of Kahua 1,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5-9-01:8). PERI Report 2003-080100. Prepared for Gentry- Pacific,Limited. 2005 Documentation on Testing of Possible Burial Features Kahua Makai/Kahud Shores Coastal Parcels, Lands of Kahud 1-2 and Waikd, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. (TMK:3-5-9-01:7,8). Ll PERI Report 2510-141305.Prepared for P-Ohana Makai/K-Ohana Makai,Kanruela,Hawaii. Pogue,J. 1978 Mooleo Hawaii.Hale Paipalapala Aupuni,Honolulu(Revised Edition). Pukui,M. 1983 '01elo No`eau: Hawaiian Proverbs and Poetical Sayings. Bernice P. Bishop Museum Special Publication 71.Bernice Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Rosendahl,P. 1972 Aboriginal Agriculture and Domestic Residence Patterning in Upland Lapakahi,Island of Hawaii. Ph.D.dissertation.Department of Anthropology,University of Hawaii at Manoa. 1994 Aboriginal Hawaiian Structural Remains and Settlement Patterns in the Upland Agricultural Zone at Lapakahi,Island of Hawaii.Hawaiian Archaeology 3:14-70. Rechtman,R. 2010 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Proposed Development of TMK: 3-5-9-01:008, Kahud 11 Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0662. Prepared for GRM Enterprises,Karnuela. L] Schilt,R.,and A.Sinoto 1980 Limited Phase I Archaeological Survey of Mabukona Properties,North Kohala,Island of Hawaii. Bernice P.Bishop Museum Report Prepared for Belt Collins and Associates,Honolulu. U AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 1',North Kohala,Hawaii 57 References Cited Schmitt,R. 1973 The Missionary Censuses of Hawaii. Pacc Anthropological Records No. 20. Department of Anthropology,Bernice P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Smith,J.,M.Noonan,and M.Bargion 1973 Lapahaki Coastal Excavations: 1970.In Lapahaki Hawaii:Archaeological Studies,edited by H.D. Tuggle and P.B. Griffin,pp. 87-114.Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series No. 5. Social Science Research Institute,University of Hawaii,Honolulu. Soehren,L. 1964 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Maukona-Kawaihae Highway, Kohala, Hawaii. Department of Anthropology,B.P.Bishop Museum,Honolulu. Ell 1969 An Archaeological Reconnaissance of the Parker Ranch Coastal Lands, North Kohala. In Archaeology on the Island of Hawaii edited by R. Pearson, pp. 15-24. Asian and Pacific Archaeology Series No.3.Social Science Research Institute,University of Hawaii,Honolulu. Tomonari-Tuggle,M. 1988 North Kohala:Perception of Changing Community.Division of State Parks,Outdoor Recreation and Historic Sites,Department of Land and Natural Resources,State of Hawaii,Honolulu. Williams,J. 1919 A Little Known Engineering Work in Hawaii.IN Thrum's Hawaiian Almanac and Annual for 1919. Thos.G.Thrum,Honolulu. Wolfe,E.,and J.Morris 1996 Geological Map of the Island of Hawaii.U.S.Department of the Interior,U.S.Geological Survey. Wulzen,W.,J.Head,and S.Goodfellow 1995 Final Report: Archaeological Inventory Survey, Chalon International Mahukona Mauka Parcel; Lands of Kamano, Mahukona 1st and 2nd, Hihiu and Kaoma, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5-7-.02:por.36). PHRI Report 1520-080895. Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii,Inc. Lj 58 AIS Update for TMK:(3)5-9-01:008,Kahud 11,North Kohala,Hawaii a [This page intentionally left blank] U U 0 0 0 C E i -J ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision Ell, Fil E APPENDIX 5 Supplemental Design Concepts for Erosion and Sedimentation Control E Lil �I L__' 0 0 [This page intentionally left blank] 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 - Cl" Lou ou IS U) 0' 0. Luu PR OD.6 'E 6 /? F 0 in z 0 0 LU E2 s 7r, w 6 E LLI E g w�oa-.-6 > -2 WE yvo >2 - w llf E dm= E.'2 <:2H zz m j 76 > N. 2- z E uj > <o 2 O CO LIJ HEf Z o �a o H I t m 3': u 3: <Mm x& X 08 0 E 62 w 0- 2o 0 .2 > 0 wu P, '22 a. :G 0 R A W 0 z < > o ,z z .9 ti E.0 —A 0— O0 c LU E.2 Mn z Ell S, 2 E w 0.2 10 0v w CD c ]05 W F- z --7 77 t-7 77 F-7 F-7 7-7 m q >0 M ET� * - a co LD.0 0 0 3 M z Ll,1. bYPi 0 2 CD w 0 3 EL 0 M 'a�o ET- ' 0 Er 6 -U SL 0 620 z ET < 0 3 60 m a w M. 6 99 aH ml M . a-R:E 'a w EF U) ET mT m, ?a UT ff Vim --I ' 0 @ 0 M 0 ET 3 me 0 o am 0 60 3 0 Mm - sl �D C 3m 3. ig u M. 0- �L'� 6 ,@ 50 ETR, M EF 0 O''.®a M am A< M cn 0 Er9� M Z z 0 w z o o 0 0 ol 0 0 60m 3 --4 0 a cn ET cn m 3 w 56 g m 3 3 3 0. m "M V5 0 n.o -01 0 1 0 Er. 9L ET cn 0 0 m -m o Er --0 OM W - 5EF 5 m 1 0 7 6'-0"Max. . 5A 0 3 0. @ w 9 w U) ET ;o co cn 0-0 ig 0 a tr S (D (D 2 ET > Er M M p1 R1 M 10 L, CD z S cn o 6'-0"Max. a 0 GO M co M C, 0 CL m C3 M ID (D 0 0 >Cl) - a) 0 M 61-01,Max m: M 0 o z =r > a a C'D z 0 . 0 Z�5%.K D3 -n T) ft .0 M 0 0 cn CD Q cn Z 1. Er 0 0 0 J, M n Cf) M CD CD Z--1M 0 0 o. 0 0 C)0 z X @ 6'- Max. (a 0 c 0 0 J N C WE Z v v ®® o ¢J n 1r + " = � U) VJ® U o ° m° U CL W )r '° m J Lu ) co . } �_c �' c U 0 1®mY � � U Z®65 E ®gra 'm 7 oo W ® m 2` z° u m m ®.w \ a — u8 m I® Z Z s OD m m m r s 9 W ` a � w m ®U)Q d m W E Q° m 'D Q c \ m a Z f. } W ll - W Z 0 Q bi N N N N 1 a U) U o hI d ..W 3 N \. c v u?° W n nl o m N 1 N� ouj ami Xevv..0-,9 m w h o. in = m m C D m m � CII!d PasodoJd;o eaJy� o m S m r w ` + N ui r a°pP fl'isa6G.�. i I u = x v w lov U w m g I ° y v N w w W i = of > � ~ z w 1 v F „ a� y 0 0 , N r a u LU ° a` R a o W `ln� pasodad;o easy h a` W U 2 O 0 C ca> C m«� 7m � P m Ea a G 4 IC a s r V�, a� ro a Jpr jj a zi c I� m cn cn � k I f. XI � � •�r a w- ,q � m T t ti•o N"J'm. � J � y D y o 0 0 ✓ mos I '�'1"i W N'"rr. Si o r "� 6; O-35 m , 3 � � Zy ,p T.2� i rbs ai'; rra S� roma 'a ons,rg� - . , uoi o � °1 � e �PI r ry'�: 9 ✓Pt���� y � _ ,�� � �5r M b rw �� a � s ¢� "i'�bn�° �%,�+� ✓ a Waw;; z� co= Ivo - p1 ,J m w I a` I w + z rn C b + r CL D m D D �; a Y � ff9 ® v p a5 ®o= ®a w ®� Woco c z� W 0 wo3 �z 2-1 f. v 0 0 m c z X x �° O o 0 c - �`uk G D-O N L N L A O 00 c c o of L@ w d� P z GJ o=_� ° �. W.S C 4 mN c a cU® a 2)d-, ENca m c m a N o uj �6 cn o d U) C: Vc U E cc cm ,mem a"I o- N N 0> O N O E '.. L m p Y .2 ME c.O d@ N .0 W N 0 ° o a o Z v o rn m >,y `m `o �.� 5 m a U c m@ .o _ o L L W @ 'O c'° .°' o o�.c°c 'row N@ > E � °>' 30 W m E o @ ° Cl coo '—oa.m > N c @ `o m m @ L m c 3 0 z oaa 3 `w > oo 3 o- 0 y = ® E 349 ioEN @ m� m o 0c °° 3 m aN ° c c o ° E @ v mo. N a n5 m 1)'_ n . N> o c > d N O @ U @ G I @ Y °O J d m N G � � O o a w o `o v o v a o Ll E m @ v o 0 7 � a s m m rn 2i m w y m o v u E 11 > o w m `o O m a v a D .M O o o m o N a w l�ll vc W a v 0 c a E2 =N a n @ > a ° v `o O C 'x m m a `o E is m°• °i Y w a. m co Z 3 > LIJ cn @ > �, o v No o 'o 'S c? o. 3 o @ �a > 10 w N a cn m tlJ m 02> u 'O d w Q co ( 2 `� m m ( in Cin m u C V1 65 o .65 w i°° W w °' Lo v v v - - vN me mo `00'o a�°i 'x t0 N `wo v 01 a°�i v C�� � ixw SSi Ar it ° o of > E� c E O.0 U Q .NO ry o y A p E URa c ° =o m o a N amiDi @c oo � ° 9a� a.'v 01 vm @0w aim o _, c> to L @ m C N 3 L N @ O O o dU 3 a K 3 a� m E o O mz 15- w `@ m m 7 a.°m m $ N m e a E2c N �. filillilf io91 f t J� c > E m m` o W @ : Oa CN @oT. LL `> cN>z O °o Mx caao NDL mE maoo �� @ � N= r ® L LuN G U @ @ N ui Wa�c @cE E@@ mcnY No Id. c7 �` > Wm > °0. 0 w > m L m e ✓':,ra. o t" �r v o .2A � -22 �V'O a� N G13ND mU CN@i J �� F �Uw nU� C m = " z ` u�m �a� «a Uao0E W 2 aa` � � 32n .- C-iazi 3 r'J- _.... � . aa5.� > _ ® a°® _ ° M G O d ( N w J p Z ax'h ® m d�� m? v5 1® cB o. - . . ..® . . ..� . . _.._ ®..� www o�°Fw P!9 m oz.s ��o �O G•1 c3Na � ,� ,Nwµ.. I w °' ^m 171 Q c 6d9 o o o w m w �PPi Q w ' r ET a m m a w o m E5. z m wm,3m > { c d Z ET N @ mma° 0 m Q' N o a w ° N en c0 3 N 3w �w �� m N o a w co o J w m w m ® FY 2. .°.O N fD S m mor J o m o w v o o J J r m a m � n w w x m o 0 ;a m >0 D r T F ® mZ cn = . >a5 ® 21 m.Z m N h 3 z.2 @0 m � o® y®n xco m U) vow .. o m"0 m ID m Z—1 g r ?-4 cn n-n o 0 000 (D mq E3 O 1 a r 1 I Marine Research CS ' November I I [This page intentionally left blannkl J 0 0 0 L3 d l ® COL �irf Ion l �- co —c 0 ., -p9�y V) Vd pi0�6 J® add f 1/OS j u I'il I i, .rc pp yy A ® (n W,d d r Y�I�i' i f fl �i Ali ,dhp.L< V) I r E c t� rk L e rr L 4- 1 0 X 0 -f® —c C3 a c: w u c 14— Ul ® C) -t— h ® r Y� O — ' Il m vi ie "w C '-+� V)® +- ., Oh 'At ji CDE v PVA 3— a) 'PAN % ai ° YS 'D u CL j3 r ®) - w M I � < O LU N � N M v FeJ A LD o , — ,ao: L TABLE 1. Water chemistry measurements at three locations off of the Kohala coastllne collected March 18, 2015 as part of the Kohala Shoreline LLC project. Nutrient concentrations are shown in micromolar units (pM). Data from two groundwater wells located upslope from the ocean sampling area are also presented. Abbreviations as follows: S=surface; D=deep; DFS=distance from shore, BDL= below detection limit. Red line separates samples with salinity equal to or less than 32%®. For sampling transect locations, see Figure 1. DFS DEPTH POa NO3 NH4 Si TOP TON TP TN TURB SALINITY CHL a TEMP 02 pH,' TRANSECT (m) (ft) (IaM) (PM) (PM) (PM) (PM) (PM) (laM) (�M) (NTU) (0/00) (fag/L)(deg.0 (%sat.) os oT 0.20 8.77 1 1.21 61.500.25 8.07 0.45 18.05 0.24 31.686 0.35 24.841 99.531 8.121 1 S 1 0.17 3.46 0.66 33.91 0.28 7.82 0.45 11.94 0.23 33.237 0.39 24.95 100.66 8.1; 2S 1 0.17 1.40 0.14 22.70 0.25 6.90 0.42 8.44 0.12 33.815 0.44 24.97 100.96 8.1 3S 2 0.16 1.36 0.14 23.67 0.24 6.33 0.40 7.83 0.11 33.784 0.39 25.02 101.54 8.131 = 4S 3 0.17 2.52 0.16 38.93 0.24 6.26 0.41 8.94 0.12 33.100 0.32 25.00 100.42 8.1 O 5S 1 0.14 0.60 0.14 11.84 0.26 6.15 0.40 6.89 0.09 34.184 0.20 25.02 100.48 8.1 5 D 9 0.12 0.03 0.14 8.74 0.25 6.04 0.37 6.21 0.42 34.306 0.16 24.97 100.54 8.151 ,- 10S 1 0.15 0.76 0.19 13.40 0.24 5.81 0.39 6.76 0.08 34.133 0.19 25.05 100.57 8.1 LU IOD 14 0.13 0.25 0.14 7.43 0.22 6.28 0.35 6.67 0.15 34.377 0.17 24.92 100.42 8.1 z 50S 1 0.15 0.81 0.12 15.12 0.24 6.32 0.39 7.25 0.10 34.077 0.16 25.07 100.35 8.151 F- 50 D 27 0.15 0.12 0.12 3.49 0.24 6.06 0.39 6.30 0.12 34.509 0.13 24.94 100.66 8.1: 100S 1 0.17 0.48 0,11 12.10 0.24 6.16 0.41 6.75 0.06 34.194 0.18 25.08 101.43 8.1 100 D 54 0.13 0.02 0.11 1.72 0.25 5.78 0.38 5.91 0.13 34.594 0.20 24.94 100.47 8.141 200S 1 0.15 0.05 0.13 1.47 0.26 6.59 0.41 6.77 0.07 34.527 0.11 25.10 100.57 8.1 200 D 73 0.12 BDL 0.12 1.53 0.27 5.88 0.39 6.00 0.121 34.546 0.09 24.95 100.12 8.15 0S 0 0.25 4.42 0.10 39.08 0.25 6.76 0.50 11.28 0.22 32.668 0.48 24.48 98.53 8.15 1 S 1 0.30 5.58 0.22 44.32 0.22 6.80 0.52 12.60 0.20 32.483 0.23 24.77 99.34 8.1 2S 2 0.23 2.81 0.12 21.76 0.24 5.96 0.47 8.89 0.15 33.547 0.17 24.92 99.57 8.15 3S 2 0.19 1.95 0.12 19.89 0.24 6.11 0.43 8.18 0.23 33.545 0.16 24.98 100.32 8.151 LU 4S 3 0.17 0.29 0.14 10.00 0.25 5.85 0.42 6.28 0.08 34.383 0.13 25.02 101.21 8.1 z 5S 1 0.20 1.27 0.14 17.60 0.23 6.74 0.43 8.15 0.14 34.027 0.14 25.02 100.56 8.1Ui5 U 5 D 6 0.12 0.02 0.10 8.92 0.27 7.25 0.39 7.37 0.15 34.407 0.14 25.04 100.32 8.14 - 10S 1 0.17 1.58 0.08 21.49 0.27 6.30 0.44 7.96 0.16 33.847 0.17 25.25 101.21 8.1 N 10D 10 0.12 BDL 0.09 6.32 0.24 6.79 0.36 6.89 0.13 34.501 0.13 24.96 101.57 8.1411 z 50S 1 0.18 0.34 0.10 9.10 0.24 6.42 0.42 6.86 0.10 34.375 0.12 25.16 101.95 8.1 A Q 50 D 22 0.16 0.11 0.03 5.64 0.21 6.79 0.37 6.93 0.13 34.477 0.13 24.94 100.53 8.1 100S 1 0.14 0.61 0.12 14.95 0.29 6.02 0.43 6.75 0.10 34.157 0.14 25.17 101.21 8.1211 100 D 36 0.12 BDL 0.11 3.49 0.29 6.35 0.41 6.47 0.10 34.623 0.16 24.98 99.42 8.1 200S 1 0.15 BDL 0.14 3.22 0.25 6.40 0.40 6.55 0.05 34.511 0.09 25.08 101.21 8.1 200 D 54 0.15 BDL 0.13 3.15 0.23 6.62 0.38 6.76 0.13 34.546 0.11 24.97 100.60 8.141 0S 0 0.19 5.10 0.63 34.34 0.24 8.01 0.43 13.74 0.56 33.667 0.23 24.76 99.43 8.1- 1 .1"1 S 1 0.18 3.94 0.13 29.45 0.23 7.11 0.41 11.18 0.79 33.829 0.26 24.78 99.81 8.1 2S 1 0.11 3.72 0.10 29.04 0.26 6.62 0.37 10.44 0.54 33.831 0.25 24.80 100.21 8.1411 3S 2 0.14 3.22 0.11 26.48 0.25 6.56 0.39 9.89 0.31 33.918 0.21 24.94 100.33 8.1 = 4S 3 0.10 2.64 0.14 26.04 0.26 6.84 0.36 9.62 0.29 33.978 0.18 24.98 101.21 8.1 5 S 1 0.22 4.55 0.10 34.15 0.23 6.24 0.45 10.89 0.42 33.734 0.19 25.02 101.29 8.1411 5 D 6 0.71 0.04 0.09 10.08 0.20 7.09 0.91 7.22 0.21 34.417 0.14 25.00 100.21 8.1 10S 1 0.22 1.64 0.05 15.47 0.25 6.68 0.47 8.37 0.27 34.252 0.21 25.06 100.53 8.1 U LU 10 D 14 0.23 0.02 0.09 5.50 0.23 7.23 0.46 7.34 0.48 34.532 0.13 24.94 100.57 8.1511 z Q 50S 1 0.24 1.19 0.09 11.92 0.26 6.89 0.50 8.17 0.16 34.348 0.14 25.07 101.21 8.1 50 D 25 0.16 0.03 0.03 2.75 0.26 6.84 0.42 6.90 0.26 34.569 0.11 25.00 100.53 8.1 100S 1 0.17 0.23 0.12 5.61 0.27 6.48 0.44 6.83 0.06 34.474 0.12 25.06 101.12 8.1511 100 D 38 0.19 0.03 BDL 3.49 0.22 6.17 0.41 6.20 0.19 34.541 0.12 24.98 100.58 8.1 200S 1 0.18 0.05 0.11 1.51 0.24 6.29 0.42 6.45 0.05 34.538 0.11 24.94 101.21 8.1,- 200 D 62 0.15 BDL 0.06 1.60 0.25 5.89 0.40 5.96 0.121 34.537 0.11 24.92 101.84 8.161 WELL 1 (6549-01) 3.30 70.45 1.05 875 0.151=12003.45 83.50 - 0.228 - WELL 2 (6451-03) 1.50 92 51 1.75 2.15 95.10 - 1.712 - - TABLE 2,Water chemistry measurements(in pg/L)at three locations off of the Kohala coastline collected March 18,2015 as part of the Kohala Shoreline LLC project,Data from two groundwater wells located upslope from the ocean sampling area are also presented.Abbreviations as follows:S=surface;D=deep; DIFS=distance from shore,BDL=below detection limit.Red line separates samples with salinity equal to or less than 2%..Shading indicates values higher than DOH Geometric mean standards for West Hawaii(GM standards are also shown).for sampling transect locations,see figure 1. DFS DEPTH PO4�L3 I NO NH4 Si TOP TON TP TN TURB j SALINITY CHL a TEMP 02 pH TRANSECT m ft /L /L /L /L /L /L /L)! (NTU) (0/00 /L (de .0 %sat. OS 01 6.20 1 122.8 1 16.94 1728 7.75 113.0 13.951 252,7 0.24 31.6861 0.351 25.351 97.40 8.12 IS 1 5.27 48.44 9.24 11 952.9 8.68 109.5 13.95 167.2 0.23 33.237 0.39 25.46 99.43 8.13 2S 1 5.27 19.60 1.96 637.9 7.75 96.60 13.02 118.2 0.12 33.815 0.44' 25.48 99.341 8.13 3S 2 4.96 19.04 1.96 665.1 J 7.44 88.62 12.40 109.6 0.11 33.784 0.39j 25.53 100.23 8.13 4S 3 5.27 35.28 2.24 ,�' 1094 7.44 87.64 12.71 125.2 0.12 1 33.100 0.32' 25.51 100.53 8.17 0 5S 1 4.34 8.40 1.96 332.7 i 8.06 ( 86.10 12.40 96.46 0.09 34.184 0.20, 25.53 99.53 8.16 5 D 9 3.72 0.42 1.96 245.6 7.75 84.56 11.47 86.94 0.42 i 34.306 0.161 25.48 98.34 8.15 U 10S 1 4.65 10.64 2.66 376.5 7.44 81.34 12.09 94.64 0.08 34.133 0.19 25.56 99.34 8.15 N 10D 141 4.03 3.50 1.96 2083. 6.82 87.92 10.85 93.38 0.15 34.377 0.17 25.43 97.451, 8.14 z 50S 1 4.65 11.34 1.68 424.9 7.44 88.48 12.09 101.5 0.10 34.077 0.16 25.58 100.32 8.15 50 D 27 4.65 1.68 1.68 98.07 7.44 84.84 j 12.09 88.20 0.12 34.509 0.13 25.45 99.43 8.13 100S 1 5.27 6.72 1.54 340.0 7.44 86.24 12.71 94.50 0.06 34.194 0.18 25.59 101.23 8.13 100 D 54 4.03 0.28 1.54 48.33 7.75 80.92 11.78 82.74 0.13 34.594 0.20 25.451 99.42 8.14 200S 1 4.65 0.70 1.82 41.31 8.06 92.26 12.71 94.78 0.07 34.527 0.1 1 25.61 100.341 8.15 200 D 73 3.72 BDL 1.68 42.99 j 8.37 82.32 12.09 84.00 0.12 34.546 0.09 25.46 99.34, 8.15 OS 0 7.75 61.88 1.40 1098 7.75 94.64 15.50 157.9 0.22 32.668 0.481 24.99 95.34 8.15 is 1 9.30 78.12 3.08 1245 6.82 95.20 16.12 176.4 0.20 32.483 0.23 25.28 97.34 8.15 2S 2 7.13 39.34 1.68 611.5 7.44 1 83.44 14.57 124:5 0.15 33.547 0.17 25.43 98.34 8.15 3S 2 5.89 27.30 1.68 558.9 7.44 85.54 13.33 114.5 0.23 33.545 0.16 25.49 99.84 8.15 4S 3 5.27 4.06 1.96 281.0 7.75 81.90 13.02 87.92 0.08 34.383 0.13 25.53 99.98 8.15 Ui LU 5S 1 6.20 17.78 1.96 494.6 7.13 94.36 13.33 114.1 0.14 34.027 0.14 25.53 99.76 8.15 i U 5 D 6 3.72 0.28 1.40 250.7 8.37 101.5 12.09 103.2 0.15 34.407 0.14 25.55 98.34 8.14 04 10S 1 5.27 22.12 1.12 603.9 8.37 88.20 13.64 111.4 0.16 33.847 0.17 25.76 100.23 8.15 LU IOD 10 3.72 BDL 1.26 177.6 7.44 95.06 11.16 96.46 0.13 34.501 0.13 25.47 100.34 8.14 Q 50S 1 5.58 4.76 1.40 255.7 7.44 89.88 13.02 1 96.04 0.10 34.375 0.12 25.67 101,24 8.14 50 D 22 4.96 1.54 0.42 158.5 6.51 95.06 11.47 97.02 0,13 34.477 0.13 25.45 99.34 8.13 100S 1 4.34 8.54 1.68 420.1 8.99 84.28 13.33 94.50 0.10 34.157 0.14 25.68 101.23 8.12 l 100 D 36 3.72 BDL 1.54 98.07 8.99 88.90 12.71 90.58 0.10 34.623 0.16 25.49 98.30 8.14 200S 1 4,65 BDL 1.96 90.48 7.75 89.60 12.40 91.70 0.05 34.511 0.09 25.59 101.24 8.15 200 D 54 4.65 BDL 1.82 88.52 7.13 1 92.68 11.78 94.64 0.13 34.5461 0.11 25.48 100.42, 8.14 0S 0 5.89 71.40 8:82 965.0 7.44 112.1 13.33 192.4 0.56 33.667 0.23 25.27 96.34 8.13 is 1 5.58 55.16 1.82 827.5 7.13 99.54 12.71 156.5 0.79 33.829 0.26 25.29 97.83 8.13 2S 1 3.41 52.08 1.40 816.0 8.06 92.68 11.47 146.2 0.54 33.831 0.25 25.31 99.82 8.14 3S 2 4.34 45.08 1.54 744.1 7.75 91.84 12.09 138.5 0.31 33.918 0.21 25.45 99.10 8.14 4S 3 3.10 36.96 1.96 731.7 8.06 95.76 11.16 134.7 0.29 33.978 0.18 25.49 99.39 8.14 5S 1 6.82 63.70 1.40 959.6 7.13 87.36 13.95 152.5 0.42 33.734 0.19 25.53 100.20 8.14 =' 5 D 6 22.01 0.56 1.26 283.2 6.20 99.26 28.21 101.1 0.21 34.417 0.14 25.51 98.431 8.14 U10S 1 6.82 22.96 0.70 434.7 7.75 93.52 14.57 117.2 0.27 34.252 0.21 25.57 100.35 8.15 N 10 D 14 7.13 0.28 1.26 154.6 7.13 101.2 14.26 102.8 0.48 34.5321 0.13 25.45 99.34 8.15 Q 50S 1 7.44 16.66 1.26 335.0 8.06 96.46 15.50 114.4 0.16 34.348 0.14 25.58 101.241 8.15 50 D 25 4.96 0.42 0.42 77.28 8.06 95.76 13.02 96.60 0.26 34.569 0.11 25.51 99.43 8.15 100S 1 5.27 i 3.22 1.68 157.6 8.37 90.72 13.64 95.62 0.06 34.474 0.12 25.57 100.23 8.15 100 D 38 5.89 0.42 BDL 9807 6.82 86.38 12.71 86.80 0.19 34.541 0.12 25.49 99.35�''� 8.15 200S 1 5.58 0.70 1.54 42.43 7.44 88.06 13.02 j 90.30 0.05 34.538, 0.11 25.45 101.32 8.16 200 D 62 4.65 BDLi 0.84 i 44.96 7.75 82.46 12.40 1 83.44 0.12 34.537 0.11 25.43 100.93 8.16 LWELL E26451-03) 9-01 102.3 986.3 14.701 245971 4.651, 168.0 107.0 1169.01 0.228 LL } 46.501 1288.71_18.20'L_27042 20.151 24.501 6 6.65 1 1331.41 - 1.7121 - - WH GM std 5.00 4.501 2.501 12.501 100.01 0.10 1 0.30 TABLE 3. Water chemistry measurements at three locations off of the Kohala coastline collected December 17, 20( as part of the Kohala Shoreline LLC project. Data from two groundwater wells located upslope from the ocean sampling area are also presented.Abbreviations as follows: ®surface; D-deep; DFS=distance from shore, BDL= below detection limit. Red line separates samples with salinity of 32%o. For sampling transect locations,see Figure DFS DEPTH' BOa3 NO, NH4� Si � TOB � TON � TP TN �TURB�SALINITI CHL aJ TERnP � 02 pk TP�ANSECT m ft f� M M M (PM) f� M M NTU o/oo /L de .0 � %sat. 0S i 0 0.04 0.12 0.85 4.90 0.34 11.16 0.38 12.13 0.49 34.557 0.50 25.35 97.40 8.18 is 1 0.02 0.22 0.341 4.57 0.30 9.62 0.32 10.18 0.651 34.549 0.241 25.46 99.431 8. 2S 1 0.03, 0.05 0.14 4.830.29 8.04 0.32, 8.23 0.20 34.543 0.14 25.48 99.34 8.� 3S 2 0.04 0.28 0.23 4.58 0.28 8.07�'i 0.32 8.58 0.25 34.594, 0.12 25.53 100.23 8.16 4S 3 0.05 0.19' 0.06 3.55 0.32i 9.51 0.37 9.761 0.19 34.575 0.09 25.51 100.53 8. 0 O 5 S 1 0.06 0.53 0.45 5.36 0.35 11.76 0.41,1 12.741 0.24 34.576 0.09 25.53 99.53 8.,.__- 5D 9 0.03 0.25 0.14 3.78 0.301 9.11 0.33 9.50 0.16 34.574 0.131 25.48 98.34 8.17 V 10 S 11 0.06 0.52 0.31 5.19 0.3411 10.44 0.40 11.27 0.28 34.601 0.09 25.5699.34 8. w 10 D 14 0.04 0.13 0.04 3.07 0.28'1 10.44 0.32 10.61 0.13 34.599 0.07 25.43 97.45 8... z50S 1 0.11 0.33 BDL 4.21 0.321 9.97 0.43 10.30 0.18 34.626 0.07 25.58 100.32 8.16 i- 50 D 27 0.05 0.21 0.36 2.82 0.32 11.77 0.37 12.34 0.12 34.610 0.05 25.45 99.43 8. 100S 1 0.06 0.02 0.051 3.00 0.31; 8.94 0.37 9.01 0.141 34.653 0.06 25.59 101.23 8- 100 D 540.05 0.09 0.05 1.91 0.29 7.76 0.34 7.90 0.10 34.644 0.07 25.45 99.42 8.21 200S 1 0.05 0.01 0.15 1.56 0.32 8.361 0.37 8.52 0.09 34.647 0.03 25.61 100.34 8. 200 D 73 0.06 BDL, 0.15 1.33 0.421'1 7.651 0.48 7.80 0.11 34.644 0.03 25.46 99.34 8.�- 0 S 0 0.04 20.72 0.05 181.56 0.51 12.48 0.55 33.25 0.271 27.4741 0.17 24.991 95.34 8.29 IS 1 0 04� 10.30 0.52 92.77 0.35 13.09 0.39 23.91 0.421 31.1481 0.20 25.281 97.34 8, 2S 2 0.06 1.44 0.40 18.46 0.341 9.38 0.40 11.22 0.40 34.050 0.24 25.43 98.34 8 3S 2 0.12 0.56 0.11 8.67 0.33 9.36 0.45 10.03 0.48 34.468 0.05 25.49 99.84 8.09 W 4S 3 0.13 0.11 0.21 4.36 0.30 8.85 0.43 9.17 0.26 34.601 0.061 25.53 99.98 8.' z 5S 1 0.04 0.07 0.38 4.26 0.29 8.30 0.33 8.75 0.23 34.607 0.03 25.53 99.76 8.', 5D 6 0.03 0.01 0.26 2.91 0.30 8.47 0.33 8.74 0.22 34.644 0.07 25.55 98.34 8.19 F- 10 S 1 0.02 0.03 0.12 1.88 0.29 9.19 0.31 9.34 0.08 34.655 0.02 25.76 100.23 8.'! F- W 10D 10 0.09 0.07 0.06 2.10 0.29 6.88 0.38 7.01 0.08 34.658 0.05 25.47 100.34 8.`t, U z 50S 1 0.04 0.05 0.02 1.76 0.28 8.25 0.32 8.32 0.08 34.656 0.05 25.67 101.24 8.14 50 D 22 0.03 0.01 0.08 1.64 0.27 8.97 0.30 9.06 0.10 34.648 0.04 25.45 99.34 8.' 100S 1 0.03 0.03 0.06 1.67 0.27 7.54 0.307.63 0.08 34.662 0.03 25.68 101.23 8.211 � 100 D 36 0.03 0.01 0.067.01 0.29 1 1.78 0.26 7.0811 0.08 34.655 0.03 25.49 98.30 8.21 200S 1 0.05 0.01 0.05 1.55 0.25 7.46 0.30 7.52 0.09 34.646 0.03 25.59 101.24 8. 200 D 54 0.05 0.01 0.07 1.231 0.35 7.04 0.401 7.12 0.07 34.643 0.03 25.48 100.42 8.23 0S 0 0.12 3.54 0.231 28.49 0.28 7.67 0.40 11.441, 1.11 33.927 0.17 25.27 96.34 8.9 is 1 0.05 3.46 0.79 26.41 0.28 9.41 0.33 13.66 0.75 33.979 0.14 25.29 97.83 8. 2S 1 0.09 3.251 0.07 26.63 0.27 6.340.36 9.66 0.68 33.970 0.18 25.31 99.82 8.17 3S 2 0.06 1.40 0.16 14.26 0.25 8.6011 0.31 10.16 0.84 34.418 0.12 25.45 99.10 8.1 q z 4S 3 0.09 0.77 0.36 9.55` 027 8.68 0.36 9.81 0.55 34.499 0.12 25.49 99.39 8. Z) 5S 1 0.05 0.40 0.43 4.48 0.27 8.09 0.32 8.92 0.25 34.607 0.091 25.53 100.20 8.05 5D 6 0.07 0.28 0.29 4.74 0.28 8.471 0.35 9.04 0.26 34.5901 0.07 25.51 98.43 8.!1r, F- 10 S 1 0.05 0.32 0.27 3.85 0.25 6.25� 0.30 6.84 0.24 34.629 0.08 25.571, 100.35 8. W 10D 14 0.18 0.32 0.36 2.81 0.27 7.871 0.4511 8.55 0.16 34.650 0.071 25.4511 99.34 8.05 z 50S 1 0.10 0.27 0.41 2.00 0.29 6.68 0.39 7.361 0.091 34.664 0.101 25.58 101.24. 8.^6 f , 8.83 0.111 34.655] 0.04 25.57 100.23 8. F- 50 D 2510.04 0.25 0.06 2.731 0.27 9.74 0.31 10.05 0.18 34.640 0.05' 25.51 99.43 8. 100S l 1 I 0.12 0.021 0.16 2.25 0.251i 8.65 0.37 08 100 D j 4 0.08 0.011 0.06, 1.78; 0.211 7.02 0.29 7.091 0.08 34.6011 0.03 25.49, 99.35 8.' 200 S 1 0.06 0.02 0.05 1.56 0.23 7.72 0.29 7.791 0.08 34.666 0.03 25.451 101.321 8i, 200 D 62 0.04 0.01, 0.04 1.24 0.23 7.101 0.27, 7.15 0.06 34.642 0.031 25.43 100.93 8.22 WELL 1 6549-01 3.30 70.451 1.051 8751 0.151 12.00 3.45 83.501 - 0.228 - WELL 2 6451-03 1.501 92.05 1.30 9621 0.65, 1.75 2.15 95.10 - 1.712 - ', rA UE 4. Water chemistry measurements (in pa /L at three locations off of the Kohala coastline collected December 17, 2009 as Part of the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project. Data from two groundwater wells located upslope from the ocean sampling area -ire also presented° Abbreviatlons as follows: S=surface; D=deeps DFS=distance from shore, BDL= below detection limit. Red ine separates samples with salinity of 32%o.For sampling transect locations, see Figure 1. DFS DEPTF PO,3- NO3 NH,' Si TOP TON TP TN TURB SALINITY!CHL a1 TEMP 02 ' PH RANSECTi (m) (ft) (pg/L (pg/L) (Pg/L) (pg/l-) (Wg/L)I (hg/L) (Wg/L) (pg/L) (NTU), (o/oo) I(pg/L)I(dog.C) (%sat.) 0S 0 1.24 1.68 11.90 137.7' 10.54 j 156.2 11.78 169.8 0.49 34.557 0.50 25.35 97.40 8.18 II1 S 1 0.62 3.08 4.76 128.4 9.30 134.71 9.92 142.5 0.65 34.5491 0.24 25.461 99.43 8.19 2S 1 0.93 0.70 1.96 135.7 8.99 112.6 9.92 115.2 0.20 34.543 0.14 25.48 99.34 8.21 3S 2 1.24 3.923.22 128.7 8.68 113.01 9.92 120.1 0.25 34.594 0.12 25.53 100.23 8.16 0 5S 1 1.86 7.42 6.30 150.6 10.85 164.6 12.71 178.4 0.24 34.576 0.09 25.53 99.53 8 17 _ 841 99.8 9.92 133.1 11.47 136.6 0.19 34.575 0.09 25.51 100.53 8.16 5D 9 0.93 3.501 1.961 106.2 9.30 127.5 10.23 133.0 0.16 34.574 0.13 25.48 98.34 8.17 i- 10S 1 1.86 7.281 4.34 145.8 10.54 146.2 12.40 157.8 0.28 34.601 0.09 25.56 99.34 8.16 W10D 14 1.24 1.82 0.56 86.27 8.68 146.2 9.92 148.5 0.13 34.599 0.07 25.43 97.45 8.17 z 50S 1 3.41 4.62 BDL 118.3 9.92 139.6 13.33 144.2 0.18 34.626 0.07 25.58 ,100.32 8.16 II50 D 27 1.55 2.94 5.041 79.24 9.92 164.8 11.47 172.8 0.12 34.610 0.05 25.45 99.43 8.16 100S 1 1.86 0.281 0.70 84.30 9.61 125.2 11.47 126.1 0.14 34.653 0.06 25.59 101.23 8.20 100 D 54 1.55 1.26 0.70 53.67 8.99 108.6 10.54 110.6 0.10 34.644 0.07 25.45 99.42 8.21 200S 1 1.55 0.14 2.10 43.84 9.92 117.0 11.47 119.3 0.09 34.647 0.03 25.61 100.34 8.24 200 D 73 1.86 BDL 2.10 37.37 13.021. 107.1 14.88 109.2 0.11 34.644 0.03 25.46 99.34 8.23 OS 0 1.24 290.1 0.70 5101.8 15.81 174.7 17.05 465.5 0.27 27.474 0.17 24.99 95.34 8.29 1 S 1 1.24 144.2 7.28 2606.8 10.85 183.31 12.091 334.7 0.42 31.148 0.20 25.28 97.34 8.29 2S 2 1.86 20.16 5.60 518.7 10.54 131.31 12.40 157.1 0.40 34.050 0.24 25.43 98.34 8.18 3S 2 3.72 7.84 1.54 243.6 10.23 131.01 13.95 140.4 0.48 34.468 0.05 25.49 99.84 8.-09 W 4S 3 4.03 1.54 2.94 122.5 9.30 123.9 13.33 128.4 0.26 34.601 0.06 25.53 99.98 8.20 W 5S 1 1.24 0.98 5.32 119.7 8.99 116.21 10.23 122.5 0.23 34.607 0.03 25.53 99.76 8.19 v 5D 6 0.93 0.14 3.64 81.77 9.30 118.6 10.23 122.4 0.221 34.644 0.07 25.55 98.34 8.19 II 10S 1 0.62 0.42 1.68 52.83 8.99 128.7 9.61 130.8 0.08 34.655 0.02 25.76 100.23 8.20 U 10D 10 2.79 0.98 0.84 59.01 8.99 96.32 11.781 98.14 0.08 34.658 0.05 25.47 100.34 8.14 W C/) 50S 1 1.24 0.70 0.28 49.46 8.68 115.5 9.92 116.5 0.08 34.656 0.05 25.67 101.24 8.14 < 50 D 22 0.93 0.14 1.12 46.08 8.37 125.6 9.30 126.8 0.10 34.648 0.04 25.45 99.34 8.13 ~ 100S 1 0.93 0.42 0.84 46.93 8.37 105.6 9.30 106.81 0.08 34.662 0.03 25.68 101.23 8.20 100 D 36 0.93 0.14 0.84 50.02 8.06 98.14 8.99 99.121 0.08 34.655 0.03 25.49 98.30 8.21 200S 1 1.55 0.14 0.70 43.56 7.75 104.4 9.30 105.3 0.09 34.646 0.03 25.59 101.24 8.24 200 D 54 1.55 0.14 0.98 34.56 10.8598.56 12.40 99.68 0.07 34.643 0.03 25.48 100.42 8.23 OS 01 3.72 49.56 3.22 800.6 8.68 107.4 12.40 160.2 1.11 33.927 0.17 25.27 96.34 8.24 1 S 1 1.55 48.44 11.06 742.1 8.68 131.7 10.23 191.2 0.75 33.979 0.14 25.29 97.83 8.25 II2S 1 2.79 45.50 0.98 748.3 8,371 88.76 11.16 135.2 0.68 33.970 0.18 25.31 99.82 8.17 _ 3S 2 1.86 19.60 2.24 400.7 7.751 120.4 9.61 142.2 0.84 34.418 0.12 25.45 99.10 8.19 4S 3 2.79 10.78 5.04 268.4 8.37, 121.5 11.16 137.3 0.55 34.499 0.12 25.49 99.39 8.20 D 5S 1 1.55 5.60 6.02 125.9 8.37 113.3 9.92 124.9 0.25 34.607 0.09 25.53 100.20 8.05 5D 6 2.17 3.92 4.06 133.2 8.68 118.6 10.85 126.6 0.26 34.590 0.07 25.51 98.43 8.05 10S 1 1.55 4.48 3.78 108.2 7.75 87.50 9.30 95.76 0.24 34.629 0.08 25.57 100.35 8.05 71 25.45 8.05 (I z 10D 14 5.58 4.48 5.04 7821 6 8.37 110.18 13.95 119.7 0.16 34.650 93.52 12.09 103.0 0.09 34.664 0.00 25.58 109.241 8.06 50S 1 3.10 3.78 5.74 56. 0 8.99 50 D f 25( 1.24 3.50 0.84 76.71 8.371 136.4 9.61 140.7 0.18 34.640 0.05 25.51 99,43 8.06 100S 1 3.72; 0.28� 2.24 63.23 7.75 121.10 11.47 123.6 0.11 34.655 0.04 25.57 100.23! 8.08 100 D 38 2.57 0.141 0.84 50.02 1 6.42 98.28 8.99 99.26 0.081 34.601 0.03 25.49 99.35 8.21 200S 1 1.86 0.28 0.70, 43.84; 7.131, 108.1 8.99 109.1 0.08 34.666 0.03 25.45 101.32 8.24 200 D 62 1.24 0.14 0.56 34.841 7.13� 99.40( 8.37 100.1 0.061 34.642 0.03,1 25.43 100.931 8.22 WELL 1 (6549-01) 102.3 986.3 14.701 24597 4.651 168.0 107.01 1169.0 - 0.228 - - - HELL 2(645T-03) 46.501 1288.7 18.20 27042 20.1511 24,501 66.65 1331.4 - 1.7121 - I - - IJVH GM std 5.001 4.501 2.501 12.501 100.001 0.101 0.301 I ' 80 10 T1 S -O- T1-D 8 60 - - T3-S 6 40 T3-D Cl) C!� 0 4 20 c, �. 2 b� 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.8 1.5 4� ............. 0.6 1.0 0.4 a d O Z 0.5 0.z -- -- 0.0 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.4 10 8 0.3 ------ � amu... 0.2 a Q 4 0.1 2 0.0 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 1.0 20 0.8 15 i 0.6 10 _' m- — _ 5 0.2 0.0 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM SHORE (m) DISTANCE FROM SHORE(m) FIGURE 2. Plots of dissolved nutrients in surface (S) and deep (D) samples collected along transects offshore of Kohala on March 18, 2015 as a function Of distance from the shoreline. For transect locations, see Figure 1. 140 25 120 T1-S -O- T1-D 20 100 1- soMax _ 131 y M —�— T3-S a 15 60 T3-D O 10 C/) 40 0 5 20 0 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.20 1.0 Q 0.8 0.15 x i 3 0.6 r» It 0.10 + O s '- Z 0.4 ' ----_ 0.05 '----- 0.2 0.00 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.6 15 0.5 0.4 - _. O 10 0.3 _- --� ---�' CL O - !— 0.2 /�------------ I— 5 0.1 0.0 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.6 40 �a 30 0.4 20 � l - =---- ~ 0.2 _ 10 0.0 0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM SHORE(m) DISTANCE FROM SHORE(m) FIGURE 3. Plots of dissolved nutrients in surface (S) and deep (D) sawples collected along transects offshore of the Kohala Shoreline LLC property collected on December 17, 2009 as functions of distance from the shoreline. For transect locations, see Figure 1. 35 1.0 �i 0.6 34 V? . � 0 0.6 33 --- T1 S -O- T1-D p f 0.4 O ' Q i 0 -�- T3-S - 32 F `- -�- T3-D 0.2 -- 31 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.5 °: _- 0.4 J 0.3 z to -'y 0.2 U 0.1 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 DISTANCE FROM SHORE(m) FIGURE 4. Plots of water chemistry constituents in surface (S) and deep (D) samples collected along three transects off ICohala on March 18, 2015 as a function of distance from the shoreline. For transect locations, see Figure 1. 36 1.2 35 34 1.0 33 -- T1-S 0.8 �- 32 -O- T1-D �- F- 0.6 Z 31 T3-S M 0.4 Ch 30 - - T3-D 29 ~ 0.2 -- 28 --- 27 0.0 0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200 0.6 0.5 J 0.4 0.3 U 0.2 0.1 - - ---_ - 0.0 0 50 100 15D 200 DISTANCE FROM SNORE (m) FIGURE 5. Plots of water chemistry constituents in surface (S) and deep (D samples collected along three transects off the Kohala Shoreline LLC property on December 17, 200 as functions of distance from the shoreline. For transect locations, see Figure 1. 120 15 100 80 10 a 60 CO rn ` O z 40 �, 5 A 20 31 32 33 34 35 31 32 33 34 35 0.8 0.8 AL 0.6 0.6 c 0.4 +X0.4 O z AA A 0.2 0.2 AV 0.0 31 32 33 34 35 0.0 31 32 33 34 35 SALINITY (%°) SALINITY (%°) Transect 1 2 A Transect 3 WELL 6459-01 ---- WELL 6451-03 FIGURE 6. Mixing diagram showing concentration of dissolved nutrients from samples collected along three transects offshore of Kohala on March 18, 2015 as functions of salinity. Straight lines in each plot are conservative mixing lines constructed by connecting the concentrations in open ocean water with water from two groudwater wells upslope of the sampling area. For transect locations, see Figure 1. 200 25 20 150 15 100 �n 10 50 ` ` 5 0 0 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 0.20 1.0 - 0.8 0.15 .............. r: A p® 0.6 0.10 + y 0 ,. AS ® zCL 0.4 0.050.2 ® � ''- 0.00 0.0 - 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 SALINITY N) SALINITY(%o) Transect 1 �2 A Transect 3 WELL 6459-01 ---- WELL 6451-03 FIGURE 7. Mixing diagram showing concentration of dissolved nutrients from samples collected along three transects offshore of Kohala on December 17, 2009 as functions of salinity.. Straight lines in each plot are conservative mixingg lines constructed by connecting the concentrations in open ocean water with water from two groudwater wells upslope of the sampling area. For transect locations, see Figure 1. TABLE 5. Slopes of linear regressions of nutrient concentrations (in units of pg/L) as functions of salinity for surface samples on two transects offshore of the Kohala Shoreline LLC project. For 2009 Transect 1 is not included as none of the nutrient vs salinity regressions were significant. In 2015, only Transect 1 had salinity less than 32%o, Also shown are West Hawaii DOH compliance slopes. Shaded values indicate absolute value of upper confidence limit exceeding the DOH compliance slope. 2009 DOH TRANSECT2 TRANSECT3 UTRIE T SLOPE SLOPE LOWER Cl UPPER Cl SLOPE LOUVER Cl UPPER CI 03 -31.92 -40.52 -40.09 -40.95 -66.69 -71.43 -61.96 T N -40.35 -51.23 -56.30 -46.31 -70.86 -107.12 -34.61 P043_ -3.22 0.06 -0.24 0.37 -0.25 -2.83 2.32 TDP -2.86 -0.81 -1.29 -0.33 -1.22 -4.44 2.00 2015 DOH TRANSECT1 NUTRIENT _ SLOPE SLOPE LOWER Cl UPPER CI NO3 -31.92 -40.37 -45.93 -34.82 TDN -40.35 -55.18 -65.04 -45.33 P043- -3.22 -0.73 -0.43 -1.03 E. TDP -2.86 -0.79 -1.22 -0.35 r xw ' ���rr�� P .r sig � "��✓r� ✓� n ; w l � an r +��pid✓ i ib °� .ur ir x. n ALrryr% "liry `�� �� r Ami � i vro-. I rr/l!G'P% %rtr rr ri i r it%���i �%J rr�/��✓l y v 1 ` � Ali �n a r it r r a s, ; x J bar FIGURE 8. View of typical shoreline cliffs along the coastal boundary of the Kohala Shoreline LLC property (top) in 2009. Underwater view of rock bottom at base of cliffs (bottom). Y r /ll y, � y, � � dr(✓' � r l� ra *v 'ih "�' ip II NI uti I J ,,,,, �%��lf✓r � � ,�� � u !? ,,,, :,. ii!a„llr„ ,/rr/;, i l/r,����r���� � ;.Y �p Y I ,., I �����H� r / r r r/ � s r, p�r� "�`;r r1(I�� ���(�(%�r� / �l�llll RF✓� n + �/.,it r" �r�f�Jr))�rJ i,. i tl 4 rT w M ° r a � Y i i FIGURE 9. Two views of nearshore Pocillopora zone near northern boundary of Kohala Shoreline LLC property in 2009. Pitted surface on spur in bottom photo is the result of bioeroding action of the sea urchins Echinometra matheai and Echinostrphus aciculatus. Water depth is approximately �P A; � a J i i N f d Itl r � � w , u L a AA I I I e r, � r , 1 F y i m, ! r 1 yl Y I ,,,✓r ,r„ �, � �' t � r��d 1. � Y 1 I lr 'All o , � 80 u a y , Y FIGURE 10. Two views of Porites lobato reef platform zone that extends throughout the Kohala Shoreline LLC property in 2009. Water depth is approximately 25-30 feet. r.n „„ .;,��,.r%l /r I,.., I,��,ur� / '/'l % !/D //r,/,.p /. ,Jl/rfl/,JJ�Ir/,;tom,. /„/0�” �. e,-.fi///rJ /yl+Oi, ,, ,; /l�i/ r,,,r.r✓.ri�:� Y, �r f / 1 1( 1. �-/r�i rf�l ar+�� �� � ,� r ,�!/o d✓r'I r //,;i��%!�, �p��/rrlr//��i,��1/�1y�///,i�/�,/,�j�,%�!�' �i`/��'i�r� �!, t,/ l/%1'�/i,/ �,/ ,�,/a it/ / ��,E� / r w la,, � 1� ! � �k ✓��/ � r I I�� %� d°��A�` P����d11 rjmK d� Rf" t�"r i� °f I u �r 5",�v�. ;U r i n n f� C a� � a S ror � u f Y Fro r' / r FIGURE 11. Two views of Porites compresso slope zone that extends throughout the Kohala Shoreline LLC property in 2009. Water depth is approximately 40-50 feet, �r %i �%r�pl/f/✓l�li�1�lG'frr 9 r/f,,?�'�,a i�i�+�UUI,�'('�`" i ✓� J � /�r%�jai%�F���,���r l�f%i������ !✓�! ', � !� � �I f „ i ,iii y���✓?0����� �i 1 � � u i/�f1� J �i � l ✓ ti%✓✓✓�fi i/til✓/rig✓✓ir��������� 1�� ✓` " ✓ ✓�✓✓ ✓elf i/��1��/l �, � ��� Ui�- �� ,��' �. � , "r it r % i i�r✓irt /� //��� ��>�Y / !�'� I.. � . .. .. ✓ /// i ✓ /i/l i✓//"/%�!� /a/f//�/%//�r �f!�n til r r✓ a�. °� u'� /�����//��i ��/✓�i�n C//�f�rif����/ % �✓ili✓ V� '�� ,v �r'� irk r i /!/✓ ✓ �✓j i i�%/��✓f�i/ri��✓i✓��i{���f���y'�+�%/f I�`�^f;���'�,mi( /��rr�r; :+f✓r,�� ,., � :„, — ti✓ii✓✓�� i �✓ ✓r ✓iii//"/i 1f✓//rl�/�//� r �1� l i r„ ✓ t� iJi i ���i✓��I�l����rr N��m,d�rl�l�m,� �j� ,,�� ', V'.,. ,. mY,. �/✓a/ f��/ri 1�/i�j /iii/�rV✓/f f�� � �. f iii✓,/�.nr i�%��/,i..,. �%✓ ���'6�f���.� r � ,e^ ,Vl�.rc�.° - .. � ti..'. .' IJr�/l r l/✓//yr✓✓��l✓�ii U/'�� � � c �f�Ya✓,��� /// � 1� I O� / mr" �';���/,/iry�//l✓��✓jr/���1�j�film l✓ �`; .; p, """- " '" a it/jai/f�i�✓%il��iit�,��ii���Il `p� �', i K, .n � w� -�_« � , F 0 I rl m m w r r "m r °S, � ✓ I s ,.... J�i f;�, � viii l r� ri�l�yo I✓i� (, ✓��r✓ ������/'�I�d��l i �H"' yr� ,}_�. �� s ,R r✓�` %r" � �� ✓ /!�✓! 1%�"" %,If lr i�f'. !r, �✓ y �'r� w����liyl ,� mudl�4i� ,�f. lY'� � �i �� � �� �i' �i a ✓, �✓ iy�f�, / ✓l� �1 �� � �'� 9i Fii! i- �d� i/�'✓` - ,,,,, ✓i It i ..... � S' �, � lfJnf� 7�,,(�eo �Y �� y��7/� ✓mr���ilr wrm rN ,r rr���k� 'w a„�r�i, Pf���� � r�„ ��� ����,�rl'� ��h�ll�n,(�i ,i ,i�^��ypi. /Ir��r�i��^ rlir,� », � �,� �� ✓n v � n�!lrl” v '�rri � r C � rc, s„ r " .,,y 'mYm � Ar "� d ✓gyp !� U ��;/ �, 1 m u rmr ��x�m �m �� .c,� ✓lt� r �r ����� sm �� U� / � � ✓ �o�� fir*'"" �, °, �' w�' rn � `��r �� U � "� sr - ,tr°. i✓ ,��, 'ww<1"�;y �i ,�� ' ' "� ✓1 '�'� � euw.a'!� w, ww Um�j� ✓" � rI iff ✓ r ,fir n '� '" mmw,,. w it FIGURE 12. Porites compresso slope zone that extends throughout the Kohala Shoreline LLC property (top. Slope zone terminates in sand plain with interspersed corals and coral rubble at a depth of about 60 feet (bottom). Photos taken in 2009. y� i iii a Yrn��I u0u vd� l >z Yo�" mrd� "�'� r�, ��in �� �/;�✓ 1 " ��'� yly alb � i t )Ji r r �ll ` I t � 1 r , � � r ,r r, 'C, �� r �P,;/t°;�� a,1� � �tir�a�✓/ o�YyU wry int* µ s FIGURE 13. Two views of boulders in the nearshore area fronting the area south of the Kohala Shoreline LLC property in 2009 showing extensive recent recruitment of small coral colonies. In upper photo, small corals can be identified as branching Pocellopora. In bottom photo, all white spots are new living coral recruits. Water depth is approximately 10 feet ry g;d ,r,.. ��,�" � GH ��y�Q� y;',�/�IUviN 7 Ali '!��lr/ 1���N�i✓�r �{rri��, i i o«, �1,11 �w t �� llrru,� ✓/N � /GdSf( /�/ '��� � r v �/t G�/�:frg� p � d v � r ! z v ,m;✓dt a rl i r ,. w a r o � I r JA I P. fd � r �1,��+��✓���s� /vU r iG" �� �rx�, dj i�� a r r ar r � r w✓� o i� FIGURE 14. Upper photo shows numerous new coral recruits to otherwise barren boulders in nearshore area off central region of Kohala Shoreline LLC property in 2009 (recruits are visible as white dots). Bottom photo shows distinct boundary between area of primarily barren boulders with new recruits (bottom left) and area of well-established corals (upper right). The distinct boundary likely represents the seaward margin of the effects of natural sediment input from land to reef community structure. Water depth is approximately 18 feet. rg N I , e o !ri �r�rpt;, r � � f�w4 � i11 '� � r � r� � y�" �� ✓ r l r YY l Y ✓ rt 7 !4 � f M !ry I Y p, 0 �i rt r r ff a �r r " r G rk i ^'l 19 t"i ;� rr✓ k 0 r r r r6 p ,,.r, l�,�� i v r6 "t r U r ,t r�t� '•; r ' c n � r P r I 1 v �m h r � r u y w a �lr I k I i I, (V rri aiir r ! r Ir �+a1��a ri .'trr � i 1 t Y r �X I. FIGURE 15.Two views of Porites lobata reef building zone off the site of the proposed Kohala Shoreline LLC project in Larch 2015. Note lack of sediment on reef surface. i �l i f)�?�i � � U '' ✓ J mr" f Y a rr ,w Via,,, r» � ✓�� � � r r � y r 6 .r mow;•; » i r'i� ° ✓ 0 h " II i i r i N 7 '° 1 YGW ✓,r J7 D✓�j is �✓r '� ��,i � � " ` ;. ,, ✓ ��Id�`s �" rte � " 6"�. 1 r?� n a, �V ^ w r n r ✓r k �X f d ff f w 19 +fin e , 1 0 e� �� lar rE""'�" � � N ��✓i r " w .I FIGURE 16.Two views of Porites lobata reef building zone off the site of the proposed Kohala Shoreline LLC project in March 2015. Note lack of sediment on reef surface. r� f ff� r r lG�e f f�ffe f f J�fir f diff f f% KAWY'AI HAR f; FIGURE 17. Aerial photograph of section of North Kohala coastline extending from Kawaihae Harbor to Kohala Shoreline LLC property. Also shown is Honokoa Gulch north of Kawaihae. Honokoa Gulch is a major geological feature and discharge from episodes of high rainfall and runoff have influenced the offshore marine environment through geologic time. e ' 1 j �l1� rlV iy�ri iii/ ,,, //r,✓/��r,it��l/i /ti i �/ i 9 �� � Oi �.._.. i ✓ �"��D /J2�� �„ �ti r' � ,, � i� �e ,�'�',�, ,.. r .,, V u 9111 r�r.;m� � ' f��m ll�/���: � ✓J r t / r�% y u rr , y c I FIGURE 16. Top photo shows boulder beach at shoreline discharge point of Honokoa Gulch in 2009. Bottom photo shows boulders near the shoreline directly off the discharge point of Honokoa Gulch. Boulders are colonized by numerous small coral colonies recognizable primarily as Pontes lobato and Pocillopora meandrina. Water depth is approximately 6 feet. w I rI" r ✓,`.,/ r�fi�pa 1 � Iri ✓r��, /lJr�✓r/ !/ ✓(��91r��/�� ar✓ <:✓JJa r �/✓0/r / , fu I r rV� T r ! rdr r �1,,� � 9 o�r1 r� , ���r j0�ry/. �.i�✓f iy' ;������� ,. i m�le+ li FYr; ii f ✓r/tii� 1 /r J r;/i r! io,r u / ,rl ,`ur rr t ry r1i/ rll�rlir rlr /i//vJf�r�'r/ Il� /i�( /1 perr j I ���� N l✓ �'��/rr+ri/ll� /,� f �1�;u� G rl ✓ U( l r lr�ri ✓ti/k p ✓a I J r�� �lr G01� / ✓i /r r � iyf !r / u +l � G r I✓ r� �/ l /� � � � ✓✓ r�N ✓ r G J d^; �r% ✓f1 lir ie! / / r r✓ I" � ri/ °1� ro y%�u r u"r y ��+r � i d�J�J � r rdl//�/ /�Y l/ / »�� �ir✓ih��mlr�✓���ifr // / ��/l/�. �„ �a +'� r�✓ r ���%r� ��������� r/� //iy�/i%��/r� %�/�>"/������r�/�iDJ�/%G!f41� k il� ' �f !� � .✓, � iYri rJb� r%✓ Jti'r✓/ /i� - i r.Gi,�✓lir/�(�� ,r, ,� l F ✓ r� I�//y rl��'1�rf// �d ������r'j ry i l I Nr. o- I / I r f. r Ilf� l I l I y�, ry tl ��/r/1/ ��Il�/✓5%°l ��/ifJrr/ 11i / I a+i � Iii, �(f jf%1i�F��rfli h7�% � //✓/r�lWr//h�rf/d�%//✓f�/ I��!1 r / u It Y� !➢ /i",.; „ ,,, /, .. /�, i:�r „i, rl��6r/l Fi�/�ll/J�l i,�i rr//% /rJi/rr f���l�r��// /r r , ✓/ r//�r�' � rr / J/ r!/fry/pit % /l rr Mfr �' f l / 11,111 '..hl I +`iii ,a,/ , �%i/ /i)✓ rl /r r / / rr r r r r/r ll���i/ 1/7rdNl ��t✓�r/ r r �irir / :/// 9/!u//r r /r��f. , U r J /fIJ"/rA 'l� ✓' !r G 1 /N � �rl✓r �r P �. li r! �'i/j�//r lydl J �� � ✓ ✓ r% r r /i q Y ✓ r � r �l �rr� r , fr'� �� ✓� f ,r, V �IA f �✓„ Jrrmr' r.✓y J�, FIGURE 19. Two views of ocean floor directly off of Honokoa Gulch in 2009 covered with thick layer of land-derived sediment from upland erosion of the gulch. The large extent of the sediment coves, in terms of both depth and area suggests that such input has been a normal occurrence of the area through geologic time, and is not solely a response to activities of humans. Water depth is approximately 20 feet. ��� � n ylar' ✓(� !/�91; ,y� A`��N� rrr >,x �- rr�r., ref ^a a ,.(. r �rm'u (n r���i� ��, a i d" F a, k N" n r H ^� a t. v r Ir � � h ,..... ✓ �i ,i�. YIP( _. .. i I i I a, 4u � S n � r AWW� cv r®( w W � u 1 q t. qq UifP bIM"a✓f,� P7k �1L^b IC' I � n o(fir ii Ip w FIGURE 20. Two views of rock surfaces on ocean floor directly off of Honokoa Gulch in 2009. Substantial recolonization of the rock surfaces by corals is evident. Brown areas between living coral colonies contain a thin layer of fine-grained mud that is likely a permanent feature of the area. No dead corals are evident in either photo. Water depth is approximately 20 feet. r ��///r%/rrr;r�hl'//r✓IJrio/rrr%,/G;11//%'%rr"/C � 0/!r// r , �i%'rJ�f�/���% /� �r '� ,r ri id�✓1!/�l�////�1��//�f�� �/ a�JI � .r/l/iii'���err���i�>� � /�� I' Ci/ l/ /i/i, Irr/r///rlrll��ylr�U1 w ,, i t r��1//,li Ir v/fr %/,���! cr i r;!r// jsli���i�j✓�✓/��� //�i�1/J i 4 w� �r ,,• � /f r9/ 1. / r -rp r//// ' l/!a 1ii�✓rr /,1 I/ rrii r/lir „ ,, ,r / r",, ,,,, ,,,pro , w ,, r rl/ / r/,�.� /1, /,i, �,.. % //r ,r„. l/ x .r, r // /></ //e,///1/ _./ r rig.,,. 'A „�„✓/ �. �! r �/ /,. 1 '/ .r r r� r���1, e�%,/ir�/////r%/ ✓/✓jr//✓/ r,,,d ",•,.' �. r,11��� ;,r%r !/,^��t�'fl - ,, r r '�>(���r✓`/�;�f %/I��,r�lr�%ri����t�%%1��/�!i/��r�/i/%1�� r;� u. ".d��u„. "~•,,1�lrr Ir'” � r"r�r,/r!� r� �, � ���!al��r, ,l f/ ��r'it�%���rri///%rl/i� � ��i� ,r � �� r�✓ ry J/ ��' i i r i rrk '� r FIGURE 21. Two views of elevated rock reefs rising out of mud floor directly off of Honokoa Gulch in 2009. Note cloud of resuspended sediment created by divers in lower right of both photo. Substantia`i 'r colonization by corals of rock surfaces elevated above the mud floor is evident. Water depth is approximately 35 feet. Y' R� ow „,ik� �r� �a � r � ��� r �/ iii✓ ✓�✓1� ����✓�� ' „ ','.; ,, � � „,e� ,, '�� ^ r ,1°" try� /;i ✓ / o �� ✓���✓;j��✓✓ � � ��ur, �✓w" i � a„ � � Y,,r; W J�/�i���/✓� i� � � rrij r�%✓���'�✓�l✓�r�f ✓/; i / ori ✓r ;.. ,�,,: „, '%;�;,�,k' ,^ "„ 9Wr� ..rA`""" .,. r,,�,�'� www,. /�`:i7�i1��i Ii�% �� ✓ �%�✓f�l��f k���irif l✓f�h rf�� ',,. �r G`/, � �l�i✓��j�/rFi✓��/ ✓r r.. rr�� ��:.. i ,,,✓✓�°.'"� �,, n�. �, ,. a��,.�rFu vr•:, w ,;'�4��r�UII�,✓/f1 iii/�d�� "�r� NSI � , 1 .iY� i✓/ivy✓✓✓� ✓�� ��/✓/la f✓ �/r�i� 'r ^, "" �„ 'l �"�h✓, ii✓ �✓i/%✓v iir<'ri����✓i��rr i�✓%✓�f�ii/✓i✓ir✓nr� � got ��' f r � � M, iw w- r. P MINI y I V�f✓" A:,. 4� �3 r, .r � /JSP) .w;4�06tl�'I' `���1 ommu,�'� � d�ll` ✓� ,/ r /✓ 4 t` � l ii i n✓✓ it✓i F i✓f�✓i��r i/✓✓✓iii/ � '�'"" ;�" . 0� ��ii✓i/�%✓�i k%�/✓�i fir//� �� i f/✓�rife/i�✓�f�i i "'"a " '"�7�'l'�' ,, ,r „.. �r s ri"✓viii%1 r� ✓il r�N✓�/j� n�✓JI� /✓i fIifi r r" i/�✓ If r it� i/l� ✓✓ l/ f✓�i � 4�r������i����������I�>�✓:.� err%�0���1 �" ar fid � I 7 s. FIGURE 22. Top photo shows large colony of Porites rus growing above sediment surface off Honokoa Gulch, North Kohala in 2009. Bottom photo shows overlapping plates of P. rus on side of rock outcrop in same area as top photo. Note areas of dead, sediment covered coral in lower right of bottom photo adjacent to areas of living colonies. Porites rus was not observed in other areas of North Kohala that were not subjected to intermittent extreme sediment input. Water depth is approximately 35 feet. f it, y f i �r7 hi" ��J411 f� iii�if7u N?7rl�i I ���`oi'i i�iA r i 0 r µ. err' r rf�r/"� �r,�rf �'rJ�� e ,! � �!6/ ✓���' lq�i� ���✓� ,�`�� � � ji,f/'t f k� rl/ fF( �'� ��,�✓�. / ����,lir ff f iyr n Jl >�r I ✓ r � �����/�/�%�fel% /// // r 1q; Y t a i FIGURE 23.Two views of boulders in nearshore zone off of Honokoa Gulch in March 2015 following episode of heavy rainfall.. Note sediment cover and number of dead coral skeletal remains. r r9✓/vrFa� �I'Ja, r � r iyi�r��/✓✓�jr y��y�� %r � rt � 'lrirr 1� i�a��✓r,�. �N�il v a���r'�� ��i', �,� ,(�r r�m✓r r��,��lK�" r � ,I r v �� r ✓,r pro r i i r r r r ✓ tr� �r✓�� ,���9 r r �r I jr'o�lr i r ri%I�G rr rlrr m-, �. r/5 % � y�d �, ✓ Idiirr ,,� r �i�, arm / �, % r r � �e(�/1/r �� i,; ri ', � ,-„d �, ”,, r„r ,,,,,,, � 9 ✓ Y r i/;�;s; i �,�,' i', �r�i�� �y/,�Y r�r�li/'�i�✓i r�i� ����El��/ i�ars' ✓lr �r1 � �.,,, � ,, ;u �', '',,,'' .% /��,r.::.rr� I „,; ;, a. r ✓�/✓ .rt a0 ,, �, rA fivllin/ u�irr r�l/Il1ke/ v. ,,. ;; '��� „ �n� yr r i.,.;; ✓y,d//�/�� ,c,,,rr„ �.,' ail /ir✓ K6IL.; r r t � ,;. ri� 1�� lIt�i��1��'ii�i , ✓... llYf'N,.7 � � ,,;,, ,,, �I�NNII rp „¢,� / ,J,.�al� �/,,�.; �:�;. I,;,��,i ��, ,�i, � ;l' ,;,G/s r �l Nd+vv� r "yir', ,r., f>7�., �(.� ;;,t� �✓i�� �ry(✓ ,�%;l��ll�N�!��r%/tiY�� ,ri �� i �� ,�11i i✓� ,l� ' ���ii np�ii � / %i�i �,�� ,h'm' u� rrrr i,r✓,, 7i� �ri � 1 , � r IrnN r�:, �, i rrk'/ �,,, ,rr��4/irk ✓ r�} � yr r � ,' m �J�»��'� � r�rr/ r�pr ���'a�i� rl .r /yl�r� , v�� r�` r;� i � i F �-�' °,,rix �i ✓rr i � �� `a r'a ri a ,�� 1� t .� r ;`, m m,, �� ������� 'PL✓ iii sir � %/j i, �%'rw� F j l r I %r Y (d�� ✓r ai A,, „r�` tlr I(��i'✓%��'� ��� �✓ 1 ��� fit° 11 ' � r,/ ��IY(%l f%Ia1 �` ��+'r !� ,�� �r��?,✓ �rr� � Pr�l ,✓�rl;rr� a H� :�%' i �, l'r�tr��i / fy � I ✓ „',,✓ � y r rra�rJ'r i� SCh�'!t �/ l rrl"r��/ ._ � � W, � ;�, � ,, ,w � � �° ✓.m: ��, y��i✓ �1A r�1r( r I � � r WYri'-,; rel i,° ✓O;,✓„r �/9rw i t ' ui �r ;� �, � ✓� r n,'aN��� u f�[� rr, ti ��� ��� �,✓� � ��n, �,�� � �� � ��>� �� ���rGi icy ���^��r „� r-� G d d�ll'IIS �rG� '� p ,� w,r ✓� �r r �, r / 'm r y ��r �' v/r' r,iii"✓, �` ,�, x ��le�Y �� �' kw �� r f�i���' �����ul�l(�'dJl�,�p�; r r »r A ✓ Of FIGURE 24.Two views of boulders in nearshore zone off of Honokoa Gulch in March 2015 following episode of heavy rainfall.. Note sediment cover and number of dead coral skeletal remains.Very little recruitment of new corals was noted on boulders as were evident in 2009. [This page intentional) left blank] yi J C� F{ ?.I I C.1 1 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Kohala Shoreline Six-Lot Subdivision E-` APPENDIX 7 Nater Resources Impact Assessment Plil Ell' Ll 1J, C 7 i [This page intentionally left blank] U IJI L i { a �+ L I Assessment of the Impact on Water Resources of the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project on TMK 5-9-1:08 in North Kohala, Hawaii F',11 r—� U I f'repccre�for. Kohala Shoreline LLC 3150139th Avenue SE, Building 4, Suite 500 Bellevue,WA 98005 Prepurac Tom Nance Water Resource Engineering 560 N. Nimitz Hwy., Suite 213 Honolulu, Hawaii 96817 n U r U Revised January 2019 -� April 2015 February 2010 I L f__ U Table of Contents ]Paqe |ntnnjucUon----..---------------------------------------- 1 | | Description and Quantification ofAspects ofthe Project which have the Potential toImpact VVaterResouroea------------------------------------------. 1 UseofGroundwater.............................................................................................................. 1 ^~ Wastewater Generation, Treatment, and Disposal--------------------- 5 Increase in ---------_----------------------- 5 (1 Percolation toGroundwater ofExcess Landscape Irrigation---------------- 5 VVetorReeourcemintheProeotAnee--------------------------------. 5 | | Groundvvmter----------------------------------------. 5 Potentia| |mnpuctstnVVaterRemourcee-------------------------------- 8 Use ofGroundwater from the Kohola Ranch Water System VVells----------.--. g - - Fotential |mpacts to Groundwater of Activities on the KoholaShoreline LLC Project Site.. 8 SunnrnaryofFindinQaandCondueionm -----------------.-------------. - 14 LJ Referencmo--------.-------------------------------------. 15 List mf | [ ~ | | No. T i t I e Paqe� 1 Location ofthe Knho|oShoreline LLC Project GdeinNodhKoha|e. Havvaii-------- 2 2 Site Plan................................................................................................................................ 3 LJ 3 Wells and Shoreline Sampling Sites in the Vicinity of the Kohala Shoreline LLC ProjectSite............................................................................................................................ 4 | | 4 Mixing Line Analyses ofNitrate and Phosphate Concentrations-------------- 10 5 Pumpagebvthe Kohala Ranch Wells as Reported to the Commission on Water U ResourceManagement......................................................................................................... 11 List mfTables No. T i t I e 1Page U 1 Summary ofAvailable Information onthe 14Wells inthe General Vicinity ofthe Noha|oShoreline LLC Project Gde---..----------------------. 8 2 Laboratory Results ofSamples Collected inthe K8euke-K0akmiCorridor nf | \ the Nnhm|aShoreline LCC Project 8ite------.----'----------.--.—.''' U 3 Potential Changes to Groundwater Discharging Along the 0.5-K4i|e Long Project Shoreline for Project VVaderUeeof5bOOC3PO.------------------.----.. 12 [J 4 Potential Changes to Groundwater Discharging Along the 0.5-Mile Long Project Shoreline for Project VVaterUeeof1O'5OOGPD -------..---..—.-----..---.. 12 vJu-0o / January omo i | | ! u Introduction This report provides an assessment of the potentialimpacts on water resources of the proposed LJ Koho|mShoreline LLC project onTMKh-9-1:0OinNodhKoho|a. Havvaii. Figume1ahovvuthe |ooeUonof the 38-ocnaproject aite. /tioonthe rnakeiside ofAkoniPule Highway and directly across from the Kmha|aRanch development. Anoriginal assessment ofproject waadoneinFebruary2O1Oend [1 subsequently revised in April 2015. This present assessment iobased onthe land use plan shown on Figure 2. The projectvvi|| inuorponabathefoUmwinQaapecteinthepnopmoeddeve|opment | | LJ ° The number ofresidential lots will besix(S)' w All home sites will beonthe mmukaside ofthe Ala Loa Trail; * Project<�(�&RnviUneotrict|mndonapeforhomeatobenetura| (kiawe. uha|oa. and/or 01, bufhe|grmmo)mrextreme xerophyte plants; * The maximum allowed water use per lot will be75Ugallons per day/GPD\; | ( * The maximum irrigated landscaped area shall be0.5acres per lot; U Irrigated landscaping at the Gated Entry and 4-stall public parking area will be not more than 0.25 acres; | | * No other common area landscape irrigation, such as along roadways,will be allowed; and Each lot owner will be required to install an aerobic individual wastewater system (IWS)with aproperly designed leach field for disposal ofthe treated effluent. LJ Description and Quantification of Aspects mfthe Project wvhinh have the Potential tmImpact Water } \ Resources ( | Four aspects ofthe project's de«a|opmmnthovethepotmntia|toimpocivvaterr000uroee. These are: use of groundwater for potable consumption and landscape irrigation;generation,treatment, and disposal of domestic wastewater; increase in rainfall-runoff; and percolation to groundwater of excess water applied tolandscaping. Each nfthese iodescribed and quantified inthe sections following. [] Use of Groundwater. Water for potable conounmptionand |andeoapeinigedinnwiUbeprovdmdby the Kbha|aRanch system. Sources of supply for that system currently consist of two wells (Nos. 6549-01 and-O2nnFigure 3). With the 75OGPD per lot restriction and another 1OOOGPD for the Entry Feature LJ irrigation, the project's tota|vvateruaevvou|dbe55OOGPD. Tooeethepotentia| imnpmotthmtofyi|ureto comply with this water restriction would have, water use at 15OOGPD per lot plus 15OUGPD for the Entry Feature landscaping, atotal of10.5UUGPD for the project, ioalso beanalyzed. Disposal.Wastewater Generation, Treatment, and Each hommeitmwill have its own aerobic treatment system with disposal nfthe treated wastewater 1nleach fields. Wastewater will percolate from } | the leach fields to the groundwater below, eventually to discharge into the marine environment along the project's shoreline. AaoyearnoundoveroQe. itiemoaumedthedvvaatevvabardiopooa|vviUaxere0e300 GPD per homesibaor18O0GPD for the G-|otproject. D Increase in Rainfall-Runoff. Average annual rainfall across the undeveloped 38-mcreproject aite iaabout ten inches. Given the permeability of the ground surface at present, runoff is likely to be no more l | than 20 percent of this, equivalent to an annual volume of 276,000 cubic feet or 2.1 million gallons(MG). Based onthe project's nix|otp|anpnementedonFiguna2. mneatimmted2.5ecn*ovvou|dbadove|opedoa impervious surfaces (roads, parking, driveways, rooftops, and other hardscape). |frunoff from these LJ ' | � cL1V-02|January 2V1g - 1 - �� � r� p • -' Kohala Ranch ' r \ ■ Q0 T k o ka S 1�' 1, • r Walakallio r ■ s • t r Bat) �� ' r Kohala Estates --'� • �r Kohala Shoreline LLC • r Project Site _ r ' f. �. ! r , 200 ( 'L L Figure 1 Kaiopaf Location of the Kohala Shoreline LLC Project Site in North Kohala, Hawaii Scale: 1"= 1000' _2_ k� o LU v Ln cu m 41 cog� Q 1 LL il , LU 6 uj { t r o �# It f i rq i 4. n x i 4 f y f I t p r i , f t b, r v , v � ✓ a e� a� co c v \ 00 Nt LO Y > LO . co Cm co ,v 9 � CO �� •, '�-,^ ��� i��� �,.0 -��d , p 4� n� 1 11 co j CO } — 47 r, U) i am P _ ✓ �+ Ni. a 41 LO 04 LO n , } _ Co Jt - - R d - 1 t J � 9C? ,r / C a) � /: _ � .�.�' � fid'✓ _._. � ftb | \ � surfaces amount to85percent of the annual rainfal| and runoff from the balance of the project area (including landscaping)remains about the same,then the annual runoff volume would be increased by about D.5MG. This would amount hoanincrease oyabout 25percent from the project aiteoverexiaUng LJ conditions. However, most of this increase in runoff would be delivered to dry wells and ultimately percolate tothe groundwater below. LJPercolation to Groundwater of Excess Landscape Irrigation. Atwater use restricted to75UGPD per lot and 300 GPD of it becoming domestic wastewater,the remaining 450 GPD per lot would be landscape irrigation. Added to the 1000 GPD of irrigation at the Entry Feature, total irrigation would be LJ 3700 GPD. If it is conservatively assumed that 15 percent of this would be in excess of plant uptake, 555 GPD of applied landscape irrigation would percolate to the groundwater below. \ < For the parallel set of calculations with water use at 1500 GPID per lot and 1500 GPD to irrigate the Entry Feature,the total irrigation use would be82UOGPD. Percolation tngroundwater ed15percent ofthe applied landscape irrigation would be123O (3PID. Water Resources in theProject Amam ~ Groundwater. Knowledge ofgroundwater conditions inthe vicinity ofthe project site comes primarily from the wells identified onFigure 3and also listed inTable 1. Groundwater beneath the project | | site exists as mthin. brackish to saline basal lens overlying saltwater atdepth and in hydraulic contact with seawater otthe shoreline. The most recent, most sophisticated, and presumably most accurate calculation ofgroundwater recharge 1nthe project mreoiainUSGG8ciontifin|nvestigaUonmRepod2011- | | 5078 (Engod. 2011). The State Commission on Water Resource Management(CWRM)has delineated aquifer system boundaries throughout the State. The Koha|mShoreline LLC project iotoward the south end ofthe CVVRM-de|ineoiedYWmhukoneAquifer. Engd1(2O11)calculates this aquifers recharge m623 | | million gallons per day(K8GD). Over the aquifer's 15-mile shoreline expanse, that represents an average groundwater discharge into the marine environment of 1.53 MGID per coastal mile. |tionot equally distributed along the shoreline, however. A greater amount of groundwater flow occurs in the south end | ! ofthe aquifer where the project site is located. Thispart ofthe aquifer has amore extensive and wetter upland watershed than toward the north. Assuming 5Upercent greater than average recharge inthe vicinity ofthe project oitevvou|dtrano|mtehnorateof2.3K8GDpercoaota| noi|e. Sinmatheproject site | { epmnomboutaU.5-mi|acoaodo|vvidth. DroundvvatarUovvbeneoththeaibaanddiochargin0a!on0ds U shoreline ieonthe order mf1.15MGD. This amount does not consider ongoing pumpagebywells upAnadientofthe project site. This adjustment to the groundwater flow is quantified in a section following. -- In contrast to the thin and brackish basal lens that occurs beneath and near to the projectuUe' several of the wells at higher elevation have demonstrated some interesting anomalies, including the | \ following: � The two wells that are furthest inland inthe Kohm|oRanch property(Nom. GO49-D1and-U2on Figure 3)encountered high level,(rather than basal)groundwater, an unexpected result. Subsequent geophysical surveys (Blackhawk, 1990)indicated that this non-basal condition exists over the relatively wide area indicated onFigure 3. |tincludes the two-lower elevation Koha|a Ranch wells. Given the subsurface \ / ' ' femturemoraotngthiamnomna|yara|ihe|yboba |ayennofpoodypenneab|e|avm0oxwanrextanaiva ash deposits that have been weathered toclay. -5- ^~ � Cc E 0 co v 0 .0 0 0 0 0 0) tm 0) co CD m 0) 10 a CL CL c c :3 D m m m D 0 cu m 0 .0 a) cn co O c O co m m O cu to CL — cr- 0 D n Lq tl C) C) 0 C) 0 0 C) co c C) Cl C14 N co a) CO I- W V- CD II to a E c: @ @ @ CD @ @ C) LO 0 Nr C) C) Iq t " 6 C6C6 w z C) .(D (D C) C> C) LO .r r CD C) CO ) U') LO C) ,, C 0 D fl- m 'Tr LO CD C') a 0 N N N m c 0 C\l co m T (D 0 r- L) T r E = U) (D m E m cm cc 000 C4 m C14 NW r": C) M r,� R co C: C -j Cc M P- CY) C14 Occ a) 0 (D cc m = 4- C) CD 0 0 co ) Lo c C:) CS, m U*) U') 0 m 0 a V) w " CV) co 0 m C:, '- , w C) Nr C) CD Q LO U') m m It r- w 1,- 0 .4 m CA C%j It (D 4- o cc im E w w w E 0 CO N co CO 0 E c o a) A cu a L) i5 c D 0 a) sn E r E I a 0 0) C) (D LO m LO 0 C) co LO 0 LJ = co co ItT llqr I-T It to CD 0) f-- C.0 Ce) M a) 2 > oo I- m co 00 co co m co N m 3: (D 0) V- (D W 16 ^ J CD m N m m CD N 19t CO CO C) w co I- r— m (D Il- w as m m m w w m w m co co OD m m m 0 0 m m m m m 0 m cz m 0 T- V- Ll 0 a) Q (N 0 (D c 4) E E a) c a c c 0 a 0 0 M m ca — 0 a M M M M — — Z w 0 cc co 4- z 3: X W W W 0 0 J 0 c LL E E 0 m m m m 2)— C6 cc m m 0 rn 32 2) a) 3: F- 0 co co 04 0 0 0 0 > E m Li C: 6 CV C14 M 04 T- LO 04 M z 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 9 0 m m m m m 0 0 C) 0 0 r- — It It It NT Irlr It 0 0 LO U) 0 LO LO LO 0 0 Cf) (D M Nr LO Nr U') It 'IT 'T "It Nr 'It z U') LO M I CO co CO CO w w CO 0 w w CO CO to co -6- 1 | | U ° The State DHHLtest well (No. located near to and south of the two Kohala Ranch Water System wells(Noo. 6549-01and-02)was more saline than expected. Itmay bmthat subsurface features which create high level groundwater further inland are also limiting the rnauha-to-makaigroundwater flow atthis test well site. * Another State DHHL test well further to the south (No. 6448-01)had completely anomalous il results. It had a very low static water level (only 1.0 feet as compared to an expected 4 to 5 feet) and high salinity(chlorides of 2500 mg/l as compared to an expected 150±mg/1). Due tothese results,the borehole was not pump tested or completed as a production well. LJ Toprovide mnindication ofgroundwater quality, two wells in themmukmfnmkaicorridor ofthe project were sampled. Sampling was also done atthe three ahonu|inalocations shown onFigure 3ho [] characterize the ground vvotmratits point mfshoreline discharge. All ofthese water quality results are compiled inTable 2. LJ Figure 4 plots these results for NO3 and PO4 on mixing lines of these constituents. The mixing lines are linear plots using two end points,the well furthest inland (No. 6549-01)and the ocean offshore. If the samples collected along the shoreline plot above the line, it demonstrates an enrichment of that [] constituent in the groundwater's travel to and discharge at the shoreline. Uthe intervening sample plots on the mixing line, it would be a simple dilution of the two endpoints and indicate no change to that constituent. Finally, if the intervening sample plots below the mixing line, it indicates a depletion of that | | constituent. These results show that there iamnapparent enrichment ofNOobv naturalprocesses and/or inputs from the upgradient Kohala Ranch and Kohala Estates developments. |ncontrast, there appears to be a depletion Of PO4. i / Potential Impacts to Water Resources Wells.Use of Groundwater from the Kohala Ranch Water System /#present, supply to customers of the Nohm|a Ranch Water System is provided by Wells 8549'01 and-02. These wells are L11 2.6mi|eain|mndmndatabout14SD�oote|evetion. Baeedundedunapo�edtothe{%�RKX. pumnpmUehao average about O.7yW(�Osince 2OO8 (refer hoFigure 5\. Thep 'acfo�otinnabadaverageuaeof55OOor 10,500 GPD would represent an increase of pumpage of about one (1)percent, well within the capacity of | / the system. It is estimated that groundwater withdrawal by either of these well pumps affects the shoreline groundwater across a width of about 1.4 miles, potentially including the southern half of the Koha|aShoreline LLC project eite. Two other aspects ofthis ongoing punnpage are notable: The O.7MGD average pumpagebvthe Kohak* Ranch Water System wells has reduced the input ofnitrogen and phosphorus into the marine environment substantially. This flovvnauaand nutrient | | reduction need tobeaccounted for inassessing impacts ofthe Noha|aShoreline project. LJ w The"safeyield"of the two Kohala Ranch wells, defined as their capacity with one well as \ i standby, ioabout 1.OMGD. This amount iabeing approached bytheir current summertime punnpege. Anecessary increase insupply capability iaforeseeable. |twill entail outfitting one or - the other of its two unused wells on the Kohala Ranch property(Nos. 6649-01 or-02 on Figure 3). -7- U Table 2 FJ Laboratory Results nfSamples Collected inthe K0euko-WYakaiCorridor ofthe Koha|oShoreline LLC Project Sde LJ Sample Location NO3 NH4 DON TN PO4 DOP TP Silica Salinity Well 6549-01 70.4 1.05 12.0 83.5 3.30 0.15 3.45 875 0.228 LI Shoreline Site 1 0.12 0.85 11.2 12.1 0.04 0.34 0.38 4.90 34.56 U Shoreline Site 2 20.7 0.05 12.5 33.2 0.04 0.51 0.55 182 27.47 Shoreline Site 3 3.54 0.23 7.7 11.4 0.12 0.28 0.40 28.5 33.93 Ocean Offshore 0.01 0.12 7.8 7.9 0.10 0.28 0.38 1.8 34.65 | | ` Notes: 1. 8amnolea,mdlectedonDecember 17. 2UO0bvSteve Dollar and Tom Nance. 2. Laboratory analyses byMarine Analytical Specialists(EPAbabcode: H| 0OOO9). | \ 3. Results presented inmicro-molar(pM)units can beconverted tomilligrams per|derbvmnubklvngbv the atomic weightanddividingby1OOO. L | | Li U | i ` Eli) \ ! u q_19-02 January 2019 -8- (moi Figure 4. Mixing line Analyses of Nitrate and Phosphate Concentrations r—, Mixing Line Analysis of Nitrate Concentrations 100 100 i---, Well 6451-03 90 90 80 80 A— Upgradient Wei 6549-01 70 70 g 60 60 c 0 t i 3 50 50 a v c 0 U 40 40 I w 30 Shoreline Site 2\ 30 20 Shoreline 20 t Site 3 10 10 i 0 , 0 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 Salinity(PPT) Ocean Offshore r • Sample Sites —Mixing Line 3 Mixing Line Analysis of Phosphate Concentrations 3.5 3.5 A—Upgradient Well 6549-01 i 3.0 3.0 i ' m 2.5 2.5 0 ! c 2.0 2.0 t c { V C U 9 1.5 GWe116451-03 1.5 IL IL c w I _ 1.0 1.0 �I Shoreline Site 3 0.5 l 0.5 Shoreline Site 2- \\a 0.00.0 f 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 3 Salinity(PPT) Shoreline Site 1 Ocean Offshore o Sample Sites —Mixing Line f I i -9- Ca C) OA ORrl� c0 U) Ci N0 C) C) C) C) C> 0 0 0 C) FJ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . U*) Q N Fill CO U') 04 N ce) o C) N C14 4) p- Q 'm 00 >0 04 CI4 '00 V- 0 N 00 04 rn C 0 0') 04 N T 0 0 CL E E0 U a CC) IL 0) C) co N .LM U- LO D-44 N r U�N 0) N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O OS CR11: Ip to V: Ci C) C) CD a C) C> 0 C> 0 0 a!Dw oBeimeAv - 10- | | UPotential Impacts to Groundwater of Activities on the Kohala Shoreline LLC Proiect Site. Tables 3 and 4 are compilations of potential impacts to Qroundvvater0ovvuake and nitrogen and phosphorus loading due toactivities onthe project aiteforp 'ectvvateruoeof55OOmnd1O.5OOGPO. |naddition to the data and calculations presented pmavioue|y,the following assumptions are incorporated in the ueauUo onTables 3and 4: The estimated 1.15 IVIGID of groundwater flowing beneath the Kohala Shoreline LLC projectmde and discharging along its 0.5-mile long shoreline has been reduced by about 0.35 MGID by the pumping of upgradient wells. This leaves a residual flowrate beneath the projectoiteofmbout LJ 0.80 MGD. ° Aportion ofthe purnpmgeofthe Knho|aRanch wells hosupply the Kohm|aShoreline project, LJ would reduce the flovvrotebeneath the project. |tiaassumed that half ufthis upgnadientincrease inwell pumpmgewould impact the project's ohons|ine. LJ � Forvvaotwvvutertreatmnentanddiepnna|. eUsixreeidenoeevvou|duoeeyotmmaouchaathe Cyclical Biological Treatment(CBT)system evaluated in Babcock eta| (2008). o Wastewater generation would be 300 GPID per lot, 1800 GPD for the six lots. LJ o Raw wastewater would contain total nitrogen (TN)at 50 milligrams per liter(MG/L)and total phosphorus 0FP\at1OyWG/L. o Removal rates the CBT system would be 85 percent for TN and 75 percent for TP LJ o Effluent from the CBT system would bedisposed ofinleach fields. o Upon passage through the leach fields, the effluent would travel downward through unsaturated lava flows and then travel with the basal groundwater to discharge along the [] project's shoreline. o Removal of TN and TP during passage through the leach field and unsaturated lavas are Ell! conservatively assumed tobe7Oand SOpercent, respectively. ° Total applied irrigation use would amount to,3700 GPID for water use at 750 GPID per lot and 820OGPDfor use ad1500GPDper lot \ | o 15percent ofapplied irrigation water would pass below the root zone, ultimately reaching the groundwater below o The TN and TP of the percolating applied irrigation water would be twice as great as in | | the applied irrigation water. o Natural TN and TP removal rates during downward passage through unsaturated lavas and lateral travel with the groundwater to the shoreline are conservatively to be 50 and Li 8Opercent, respectively. m Aepresented previously, the increase inrainfall runoff due tothe project vvnu|dmrnounttoO.5K8G Ell annuoUy, aquivm|enttoayeor-rounddai|yavenageofO.0014K8GD (14OOGPD). o TN and TP concentrations in the rainfall runoff would be 1.3 and 0.1 MG/L, respectively. o All of the additional rainfall runoff would be captured in dry wells, ultimately reaching the � | groundwater below. o Natural removal rates of TN and TP in the downward travel through unsaturated lavas - and lateral travel with groundwater to the shoreline would be 50 and 60 percent, respectively. U | / - 11 - U F1 Tab�3 `� Potential Changes toGroundwater Discharging Along the U.5'MikaLong Project Ghons|inoforPo 'entVVeterUoeof55OOGPD [j Component of Flow Flowrate Nitrogen Phosphorus Existing Conditions 0.8000 7.7902 0.7127 Changes as a Result of the Project . Draft from Kohala Ranch Wells -0.0028 -0.0268 -0.0024 . Generation, Treatment, and Disposal of +0.0018 +0.0337 +0.0037 Domestic Wastewater . Percolation of Excess Applied Landscape +0.0006 +0.0054 +0.0005 Irrigation . Capture and Disposal of the Increase in Rainfall. +0.0014 +0.0076 +0.0005 Runoff in Dry Wells Post Development Conditions 0.8010 7.8101 0.7150 ~ Table Potential Changes to Groundwater Discharging Along LJ ` the O.5-K8i|oLong Project 8honaUneforPojactVVoterUsoof1U,5OOGPD Existing Conditions 0.8000 7.7902 0.7127 Changes'as a Result of the Project . Draft from Kohala Ranch Wells -0.0052 -0.0512 -0.0046 | | . Generation, Treatment, and Disposal of +0.0018 +0.0337 +0.0037 Domestic Wastewater n Percolation of Excess Applied Landscape +0.0012 +0.0120 +0.0010 Irrigation . Capture and Disposal of the Increase in Rainfall. +0.0014 +0M76 +0.0005 Runoff in Dry Wells Post Development Conditions 0.7992 7.7923 0.7133 - o_1S-02|January 2U1S - 12- | ) F7 U| ' u uSummary of Findings and Conclusions Ell 1. Implementation of the revised project plan would create six(6)residential lots on the 38-acre site. 2. The projectnepreuentathat.thnmughnaathctionminiteCC&Rs. vvmteruoevvou|dbeUmitedto75D GPD per residential lot. Allowing for landscape irrigation onO.25acres ofits entry feature,the L] project's potable water use under this restriction would be 55OOGPD. The report presents an analysis ofpotential impacts nngroundwater for this water use rate and the requirement touse individual aerobic treatment systems and leach fields for the treatment and disposal of domestic [) wastewater. 3. Tocompare the impact ongroundwater ifthe water use rate iegreater than 7hOGPD per | ( residence, an analysis of potential impacts for water use of 1500 GPD per lot is also presented. 4. Tables 3 and 4 compare respective impacts on groundwater for the 750 and 1500 GPD water use | | rates per residence. For both rates ofwater use,the potential impact on groundwater beneath the project aite and ultimately discharging along its shoreline ievery modest. Adeither ofthe water use rates,for example, increases in nitrogen and phosphorus are calculated to be ( ( oubatandmUyless than one (1)percent. ` ' 5. Probably contrary to expectation, the additions ofnitrogen and phosphorus discharging into the Elnluhneenvmnnmerdforthe15OO<�PDperresidenoe0nemtervveterum* raieanaactuaU �ysmthen for water use ed75OGPD per lot. The reason for this imthat the removal ofnitrogen and phosphorus by the increased draft from the Kohala Ranch wells more than offsets the increase in | | the amount of excess applied irrigation water reaching the groundwater below. [1 ` H. The makm�tedpotenUo|changes togroundwater discharging along the p 'enteohore|ineeuaoo | ) small as to not be detectable relative to natural seasonal variations of these parameters. | � [] LJ L� - 13- LJ LJ Reverences Bebcoch, R.VV.Jc,A. GenthU|. l[ Huang, Y. Chanthawornsawat, S. Kanpirom, and J. Hu. 2006. Performance Evaluation of a CBT O.8KF-21UWastewater Treatment Unit. Project Completion u Report for"Performance ufenOn-Site Wastewater Treatment ." Project Period : 15May 2OO4to14May 2UO5. Belt Collins &Associates. 1983. New Potable Water Source, Nuha|uRanch Water System, Nodh Knha|a. Havvaii Consultant Report Prepared for Kbhu|oRanch and Submitted tothe State Department ofHealth. LJ B|oohhavvkGeoocenceo. Inc. 1990. Geophysical Survey, Groundwater Eva|uahon'Kohm|a Ranch, Island of Hawaii. Consultant Report Prepared for Koha|oJoint Venture. LJ Bovv|ea. S.P 1078. AWater Review ofKoha|aEstates and Vicinity. Consultant Report Prepared for,the Hilton Head Co.' Inc. LJ Engob. J.A. 2011. A Water Budget Model and Assessment of Groundwater Recharge for the Island of Hawaii. USGQScientific Investigations Report 2O11-5O78 [] Nance T. 1988. Recommended Locations for Kohala Ranch Water Company's Third and Future Wells. Consultant Report Prepared for Noha|aRanch. | | TNVVRE. 1990. Engineering Report, Kohala Ranch Well No. 3, New Potable Water Source, Kohala Ranch Water System, North Kohm|o. Hawaii. Consultant Report Prepared for Kbhu|mRanch | | Water Company and Submitted tothe State Department ofHeabh. TNVVRE. 1992. Estimated Sustainable Yields of the High Level and Basal Aquifers Beneath the Kohala | | Ranch Property. Consultant Report Prepared for Nbhm|aJoint Venture. TNVVRE. 1994. Engineering Report, Kohala Ranch Well No.4, New Potable Water Source, Kohala | | Ranch Water System, North Koho|o. Hawaii. Consultant Report Prepared for Kbha|aRanch Water Company and Submitted tothe State Department ofHealth. LJ TNVVRE. 1994. Evaluation ofWell No.4ofthe Nbhm|a Ranch Water System. Consultant Report Prepared for Kbha|mJoint Venture. | ! LJ ' L1 - 14- U � r C SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGE CBAWERSON - GOVERNOR OF HAWAII •� OON F LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES r u••••i •.� J L N RM 75 CO SION WATER RESQUgCE MI}NAGEIvEDIT ('� . x, 555 ROBERT IC,YgUDA. _ - :s5:1 �a ttllt� LL �i �'` {T MST 6EPUtY cioi�nd and/V rt.M1 �:•s. PLAN#s E`, 1+L1 rn H�p��ll�i.(_)N( M.KALE0 NIANUEL _... .... l: OUNTY :VF HAWAII DEPUTY DIREC76R'PLATER 'a `'S,•',1 �'+rJ AQUATIC RESOURCES .` a4i "^'.1 n '��+•yt;""•-• , ? BOATING AND DCEANRECREATIbN ` w •BUREAUOFCONVEYANCES ,... u . Cot,MOSSTON ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEhSFNS CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS 'STATE L� OP HAWAII =T TT CONSERVATTONANDRESOURCES ENFORCMAWT +, 11.t'� E 1' LLa`��'t All ENGINEERMG FORESTRY AND Wt[DLffE^.^-___ ,. ' SrateopNa\` DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES IMM RIC PRESERVATION s, KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION sTA LAND* ARKs b' KAKUHIHEWA'BUILDING ., 601 KAMOKILA BLVD,STE 555 .-- KAPOLEI,HAWAII 96707 June 3,2019 . ».. .. ..,__ IN REPLY REFER TO' Michael Yee,Planning Director Log.No.2019.00_Q'7._U_ County of Hawaii—Planning Department Doc.No. 1905SN50 � 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Archaeology Hilo,Hawaii 96720 planring@hawaiicounty.gov Dear Mr Yee, SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review— Request for Revisions to Agreed=Upon Mitigation Commitments for the Kohala Shoreline Project Kahua Ahupua`a,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii TMK:(3)5-9-001:008 This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) comments on a request to revise agreed- upon mitigation measures. SHPD received this request on January 9, 2019. ASM Affiliates, on behalf of Kohala Shoreline LLC, requests that based on recent changes to development plans for the proposed subdivision, from a 9- lot subdivision to a 6-lot subdivision,that the agreed-upon mitigation measures be revised to allow some of the sites slated for data recovery to be placed in preservation. In a letter dated February 8, 2016 (Log No. 2015.02305, Doc. No. 1602KM15), a supplemental archaeological inventory survey (AIS) was accepted for the project area which totals 37.8 acres, comprising the entirety of TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008. The Iandowner proposed development of a 9-lot subdivision for a single-residence gated community. The development would involve rezoning from Residential (RS)to Residential Agricultural (RA).The proposed project would involve construction of single-residence dwellings on each lot,two internal roadways, and public shoreline access and associated parking lot. Residential units would utilize existing water, electrical, and telecommunication lines. The Supplemental AIS(Rechtman 2016)was prepared in support of the previous AIS(Graves and Franklin 1998)to provide the following: (1) assessment of current site conditions; (2) relocation of previously identified sites and identification and documentation of any newly identified sites and features; and (3) revised mitigation recommendations. A total of 40 historic properties were documented; 39 previously identified sites were relocated and further documented,and a single,newly-identified site was recorded(Site 50-10-05-29271).Pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) §13-284-6, the Supplemental AIS evaluated all of the 40 sites as significant with 30 sites significant under Criterion "d" (information potential) only; 7 sites as significant under Criteria "d" and "e" (significance to particular group); 2 sites as significant under Criteria"c" (method of construction, craftsmanship) and "d" (information); and one site as significant under Criteria"c", "d", and "e". In addition to the significance evaluations, the Supplemental AIS updated proposed site mitigation recommendations as follows: archaeological data recovery for 16 sites; preservation for 16 sites; data recovery and burial preservation for 2 sites; burial preservation for 3 sites; and no further work for 3 sites. The project effect determination for the proposed subdivision is "Effect, with agreed upon mitigation commitments."The SHPD concurred with the site significance assessments and the mitigation commitments. Ei;fI ns,� t,�'oJ DI pp 4 I��.�:1 � M gr 9 r_R 8 Mr.Yee June 3,2019 Page 2 The current submittal indicates that with the current changes to the proposed subdivision plan,proposed changes to the agree-upon mitigation commitments are as follows: Proposed Revision of Mitigation Commitments Site No. Current Mitigation Proposed Revised 50-10-05- Commitment Mitigation Commitment 2496 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation Preservation/Burial Preservation 2498 Preservation 2499 Preservation 4000 Preservation 4002 Data Recovery 4003 Data Recovery 4004 Burial Preservation 4005 Preservation 4010 Data Recovery Preservation 4011 Preservation 4012 Data Recovery Preservation 4013 Data Recovery/Burial Preservation 4015 No Further Work 15261 Preservation 16131 Preservation 16132 No Further Work 16133 Preservation 16134 Preservation 16135 Data Recovery 16136 No Further Work 16137 Data Recovery 16138 Data Recovery Preservation 16139 Preservation 16140 Data Recovery Preservation 16141 Data Recovery Preservation 16142 Preservation 16143 Data Recovery Preservation 16144 Data Recovery Preservation 16145 Preservation 16146 Data Recovery Preservation 16147 Preservation 16148 Burial Preservation 16149 Preservation 16150 Data Recovery 16151 Data Recovery Preservation 16162 Burial Preservation 16163 Preservation 16164 Data Recovery 16167 Data Recovery Preservation 50-10-04/05-29271 Preservation The SHPD agrees to revision of the mitigation commitment from data recovery to preservation for Sites 2496, 4010,4012, 16138, 16140, 16141, 16143, 16144, 16146, 16151,and 16167. As stipulated in HAR §13-284-7, when SFlPD comments that a project will result in "Effect with agreed upon mitigation commitments,"then detailed mitigation plans shall be developed for SHTD review and acceptance prior 1. to project work commencing. Mr.Yee June 3,2019 Page 2 The SHPD looks for'ward to receiving for review and acceptance a revised data recovery plan that meets the requirements of HAR§13-278-3, a preservation plan meeting the requirements of HAR§13-277 and an appropriate burial treatment plan that meets the requirements of HAR §13-300.33 incorporating the revised changes, prior to work commencing. Please contact Sean Naleimaile at (808) 933-7653 or at Sean.PNaleimaile(cDhawaii.gov for questions regarding archaeological resources or this letter. Aloha, Alw 16-Weel- Alan S.Downer,PhD Administrator,State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer CC. Dr.Robert Rechtman,brechtmanQasmaffiliates.com 0ZWATEgS ''° '•L'bh +? 19; ?49 *` DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAi°1 ` oFw; P� 345 KEKUANAO`ASTREET, SUITE 20 HILO, HAWAII 96720 TELEPHONE(808)961-8050 • FAX(808)961-8657 October 14, 2019 TO: Mr. Michael Yee, Director Planning Department - FROM: Keith K. Okamoto, Manager—Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 19-000073) _ z Request: To allow for a Six (6) Lot Subdivision and Related Activities Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC Tax Map Key 5-9-001:008 We have reviewed the subject application and have the following comments and conditions. Please be informed that the subject property is not within the service limits of the Department's existing water system facilities. Therefore,the Department's existing water system facilities cannot support the proposed subdivision at this time. Extensive improvements and additions,which may include, but not be limited to source, storage, booster pumps,transmission, and distribution facilities,would be required. Should there be any questions,please contact Mr. Troy Samara of our Water Resources and Planning Branch at 961-8070, extension 255. Sincerely yours, M+- Keith K. Okamoto, P.E. Manager—Chief Engineer TS:dfg copy—Kohala Shoreline, LLC ........:,.< Ih..IN, TA, lr-,S-tclx YJ Planning Dept. ti Cjf"Exhibit , , ,. is,�r - n_ 15,9, . . . Water, Our%ost ftecious resource. . . Xa Wai,4 Kane . . . The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. OJMS-4 OF y{ - �'1\litlll Harry Kim David Yamamoto,P.E. Mayor Director Wil Okabe �tE°Fe�'� Allan G.Simeon,P.E. Managing Director Deputy Director � zlunfv of Pat javl* DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORDS Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 7•Hilo,Hawaii 967204224 (808)961-8321 •Fax(808)961-8630 public_works@hawaiicounty.gov a- MEMORANDUM _. Date: October 16, 2019 _= To: Michael Yee, Planning Director T..- From: Department of Public Works, Engineering Division Subject: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 19-000073) Request: To Allow for a Six (6) Lot Subdivision and Related Activities Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Request: RS-15 to RA-5a Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC Tax Map Key: 5-9-001:008 We have reviewed the subject application and our comments are as follows: 1. Culverts shall be installed at drainageway crossings under the access driveways to proposed Lots 3 and 4 prior to approval of the final plat map and drainage easement recording. This will ensure Lots 3 and 4 have proper access to the buildable portions of their lot. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Natalie Whitworth of our Kona Engineering Division office at 323-4853. NW Copy: ENG-HILOIKONA Planning e Exhibit 4 -9019 County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. BUILDING DIVISION - DPW COUNTY OF HAWAII—74-5044 Ane Keohokalole HWY.BLDG E 1St Floor KAILUA-KONA,HI 96740 Hilo Office(808)961-8331 *Fax(808)961-8410 Kona Office(808)323-4720 * Fax(808)327-3509 0 Date of Notice: October 4, 2019 Owner: Kohala Shoreline LLC, c/o Nathan Myhrvold Mailing address: P O Box 147, Madina,Wa. 980393147 0,- Address `.Address location of property: 59-485 Akoni Pule Highway - -= M . . . SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit application(SMA 19-000073), =t Request: To Allow for a Six (6) Lot Subdivision and Related Activities Change of Zone Application(REZ 19-000237) Applicant: Kohala Shoreline LLC T.M.K.: 5-9-001:008-0000 This is to inform you that our records on file,relative to the status of the subject, discloses that: ❑ No Building permit was issued for work done on the premise. ❑ No building permit was issued for the change of occupancy. ❑ At the time of completion,the subject complied with all building regulations that were in effect. ❑ Variance from any building regulation(Building,Electrical,Plumbing,or Sign)was/was not granted. - ❑ The following violation(s) still outstanding: ❑ Building ❑Electrical ❑ Plumbing ❑ Sign ❑ Others: Fences &Accessory Structures,Projections into Building Setbacks ❑ No Objections Currently records show four open Permits with no Inspections that require a letter from the owner to cancel(Building Permits 945186, 945187, 932816, 932817). Should you have any questions regarding matters contained herein,please feel free to contact us Kelly Wilson, Architect II County of Hawaii Department of Public Works Building Division � 1r ` ni Dent. 'Exhibit Jt' ?Q1 J,�(Y OF Harry Kim � • • , Darren J. Rosario Mayor 4 � Fire Chief Lance S. Uchida raw Deputy Fire Chief 9Tg...... OF O' Count ofWart. HAWAII FIRE DEPARTMENT 25 Aupuni Street•Suite 2501•Hilo,Hawaii 96720 (808)932-2900•Fax(808)932-2928 October 29,2019 TO: MICHAEL YEE,PLANNING DIRECTOR FROM: DARREN J. ROSARIO,FIRE CHIEF SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit(SMA 19-000073) -3 Applicant: Kohala Shoreline, LLC - .... —� Request: To Allow for a Six (6) lot Subdivision and Related Activities-.Z:-;_ Change of Zone Application(REZ 19-000237) Tax Map Key: 5-9-001:008 i In regards to the above-mentioned Special Management Area Use Permit Application, the following shall be in accordance: NFPA 1, UNIFORM FIRE CODE,2006 EDITION Note:Hawai`i State Fire Code,National Fire Protection Association 2006 version, with Colinty ofHawaii amendments. County amendments are identified with a preceding "C—" of the reference code. Chapter 18 Fire Department Access and Water Supply 18.1 General. Fire department access and water supplies shall comply with this chapter. For occupancies of an especially hazardous nature, or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult, or areas where there is an inadequate fire flow, or inadequate fire hydrant spacing, and the AHJ may require additional safeguards including, but not limited to, additional fire appliance units, more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved. 18.1.1 Plans. 18.1.1.1 Fire Apparatus Access. Plans for fire apparatus access roads shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. Planning Dept. 8.@ 8 i C®I®P PWA b Exhibit i 1 { 1 f 1 — i # A�ffi % Haevai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Enepioyer. — ——- - ----- Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 2 18.1.1.2 Fire Hydrant Systems, Plans and specifications for fire hydrant systems shall be submitted to the fire department for review and approval prior to construction. C— 18.1.1.2.1 Fire Hydrant use and Restrictions.No unauthorized person shall use or operate any Fire hydrant unless such person first secures permission or a permit from the owner or representative of the department, or company that owns or governs that water supply or system. Exception: Fire Department personnel conducting firefighting operations,hydrant testing, and/or maintenance, and the flushing and acceptance of hydrants witnessed by Fire Prevention Bureau personnel, 18.2 Fire Department Access. 18.2.1 Fire department access and fire department access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Section 18.2. 18.2.2*Access to Structures or Areas. 18.2.2.1 Access Box(es). The AHJ shall have the authority to require an access box(es)to be installed in an accessible location where access to or within a structure or area is difficult because of security. 18.2.2.2 Access to Gated Subdivisions or Developments. The AHJ shall have the authority to require fire department access be provided to gated subdivisions or developments through the use of an approved device or system. 18.2.2.3 Access Maintenance. The owner or occupant of a structure or area,with required fire department access as specified in 18.2.2.1 or 18.2.2.2, shall notify the AHJ when the access is modified in a manner that could prevent fire department access. 18.2.3 Fire Department Access Roads. (*may be referred as FDAR) 18.2.3.1 Required Access. 18.2.3.1.1 Approved fire department access roads shall be provided for every facility,building, or portion of a building hereafter constructed or relocated. 18.2.3.1.2 Fire Department access roads shall consist of roadways, fire lanes,parking lots lanes, or a combination thereof. Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 3 18.2.3.1.3*When not more than two one- and two-family dwellings or private garages, carports, sheds, agricultural buildings, and detached buildings or structures 400ft' (37 rrO) or less are - present,the requirements of 18.2.3.1 through 18.2.3.2.1 shall be permitted to be modified by the AHJ. 18.2.3.1.4 When fire department access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, topography, waterways,nonnegotiable grades, or other similar conditions, the AHJ shall be authorized to require additional fire protection features. 18.2.3.2 Access to Building. 18.2.3.2.1 A fire department access road shall extend to within in 50 ft(15 in) of at least one exterior door that can be opened from the outside that provides access to the interior of the building. Exception: I and 2 single-family dwellings. 18.2.3.2.1.1 When buildings are protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with NFPA 13,NFPA 131), or NFPA 13R, the distance in 18.2.3.2.1 shall be permitted to be increased to 300 feet. 18.2.3.2.2 Fire department access roads shall be provided such that any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located not more than 150 ft (46 m) from fire department access roads as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the building or facility. 18.2.3.2.2.1 When buildings are protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with NFPA 13,NFPA 131), or NFPA 13R, the distance in 18.2.3.2.2 shall be permitted to be increased to 450 ft(137 in). 18.2.3.3 Multiple Access Roads.More than one fire department access road shall be provided when it is determined by the AHJ that access by a single road could be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions, or other factors that could limit access. 18.2.3.4 Specifications. 18.2.3.4.1 Dimensions. C_ 18.2.3.4.1.1 FDAR shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20ft with an approved turn around area if the FDAR exceeds 150 feet. Exception: FDAR for one and two family dwellings shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 15 feet, with an area of not less than 20 feet wide within 150 feet of the structure being protected. An approved turn around area shall be provided if the FDAR exceeds 250 feet, Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 4 C— 18.2.3.4.1.2 FDAR shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not less then 13ft 6 in. C— 18.2.3.4.1.2.1 Vertical clearances may be increased or reduced by the AHJ,provided such increase or reduction does not impair access by the fire apparatus, and approved signs are installed and maintained indicating such approved changes. 18.2.3.4.1.2.2 Vertical clearances shall be increased when vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to accommodate fire apparatus. C— 18.2.3.4.2 Surface. Fire department access roads and bridges shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads (25 Tons) of the fire apparatus. Such FDAR and shall be comprised of an all-weather driving surface. 18.2.3.4.3 Turning Radius. C— 18.2.3.4.3.1 Fire department access roads shall have a minimum inside turning radius of 30 feet, and a minimum outside turning radius of 60 feet. 18.2.3.4.3.2 Turns in fire department access road shall maintain the minimum road width. 18.2.3.4.4 Dead Ends, Dead-end fire department access roads in excess of 150 ft(46 in) in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the fire apparatus to turn around. 18.2.3.4.5 Bridges. 18.2.3.4.5.1 When a bridge is required to be used as part of a fire department access road, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with county requirements. 18.2.3.4'.5.2 The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficientto carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. 18.2.3.4.5.3 Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges where required by the AHJ. 18.2.3.4.6 Grade. C— 18.2.3.4.6.1The maximum gradient of a Fire department access road shall not exceed 12 percent for unpaved surfaces and 15 percent for paved surfaces. In areas of the FDAR where a Fire apparatus would connect to a Fire hydrant or Fire Department Connection, the maximum gradient of such area(s) shall not exceed 10 percent. Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 5 18.2.3.4.6.2* The angle of approach and departure for any means of fire department access road shall not exceed I ft drop in 20 ft(0.3 m drop in 6 m) or the design limitations of the fire apparatus of the fire department, and shall be subject to approval by the AHJ. 18.2.3.4.6.3 Fire department access roads connecting to roadways shall be provided with curb cuts extending at least 2 ft(0.61 m)beyond each edge of the fire lane. 18.2.3.4.7 Traffic Calming Devices. The design and use of traffic calming devices shall be approved the AHJ. 18.2.3.5 Marking of Fire Apparatus Access Road. 18.2.3.5.1 Where required by the AHJ, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided and maintained to identify fire department access roads or to prohibit the obstruction thereof of both. 18.2.3.5.2 A marked fire apparatus access road shall also be known as a fire lane. 18.2.4* Obstruction and Control of Fire Department Access Road. 18.2.4.1 General. 18.2.4.1.1 The required width of a fire department t access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including by the parking of vehicles. 18.2.4.1.2 Minimum required widths and clearances established under 18.2.3.4 shall be maintained at all times. 18.2.4.1.3* Facilities and structures shall be maintained in a manner that does not impair or impede accessibility for fire department operations. 18.2.4.1.4 Entrances to fire departments access roads that have been closed with gates and barriers in accordance with 18.2.4.2.1 shall not be obstructed by parked vehicles. 18.2.4.2 Closure of Accessways. 18.2.4.2.1 The AHJ shall be authorized to require the installation and maintenance of gates or other approved barricades across roads,trails, or other accessways not including public streets, alleys, or highways. 18.2.4.2.2 Where required, gates and barricades shall be secured in an approved manner. Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 6 18.2.4.2.3 Roads, trails, and other access ways that have been closed and obstructed in the manner prescribed by 18.2.4.2.1 shall not be trespassed upon or used unless authorized by the owner and the AHJ. 18.2.4.2.4 Public officers acting within their scope of duty shall be permitted to access restricted property identified in 18.2.4.2.1. 18.2.4.2.5 Locks, gates, doors,barricades, chains, enclosures, signs,tags, or seals that have been installed by the fire department or by its order or under its control shall not be removed, unlocked, destroyed, tampered with, or otherwise vandalized in any manner. 18.3 Water Supplies and Fire Hydrants 18.3.1*A water supply approved by the county, capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which facilities or buildings, or portions thereof, are hereafter constructed, or moved into or within the county. When any portion of the facility or building is in excess of 150 feet(45 720 mm) from a Water supply on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on- site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided when required by the AHJ. For on-site fire hydrant requirements see section 18.3.3. EXCEPTIONS: 1. When facilities or buildings, or portions thereof, are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system the provisions of section 18.3.1 may be -modified by the AHJ. 2. When water supply requirements cannot be installed due to topography or other conditions, the AHJ may require additional fire protection as specified in section 18.3.2 as amended in the code. 3. When there are not more than two dwellings, or two private garage, carports, sheds and agricultural. Occupancies, the requirements of section 18.3.1 may be modified by AHJ. 18.3.2* Where no adequate or reliable water distribution system exists, approved reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, fire department tanker shuttles, or other approved systems capable of providing the required fire flow shall be permitted. 18.3.3* The location,number and type of fire hydrants connected to a water supply capable of delivering the required fire flow shall be provided on a fire apparatus access road on the site of the premises or both, in accordance with the appropriate county water requirements. 18.3.4 Fire Hydrants and connections to other approved water supplies shall be accessible to the fire department. Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 7 18.3.5 Private water supply systems shall be tested and maintained in accordance with NFPA 25 or county requirements as determined by the AHJ. 18.3.6 Where required by the AHJ, fire hydrants subject to vehicular damage shall be protected unless located within a public right of way. 18.3.7 The AHJ shall be notified whenever any fire hydrant is placed out of service or returned to service. Owners of private property required to have hydrants shall maintain hydrant records of approval, testing, and maintenance, in accordance with the respective county water requirements. Records shall be made available for review by the AHJ upon request. C— 18.3.8 Minimum water supply for buildings that do not meet the minimum County water standards: Buildings up to 2000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 3,000 gallons of water available for Firefighting. Buildings 2001- 3000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 6,000 gallons of water available for Firefighting. Buildings, 3001- 6000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 12,000 gallons of water available for Firefighting. Buildings, greater than 6000 square feet, shall meet the minimum County water and fire flow requirements. Multiple story buildings shall multiply the square feet by the amount of stories when determining the minimum water supply. Commercial buildings requiring a minimum fire flow of 2000gpm per the Department of Water standards shall double the minimum water supply reserved for firefighting. Fire Department Connections (FDC) to alternative water supplies shall comply with 18.3.8 (1)- (6) of this code. NOTE: In that water catchment systems are being used as a means of water supply for firefighting, such systems shall meet the following requirements: 1) In that a single water tank is used for both domestic and firefighting water,the water for domestic use shall not be capable of being drawn from the water reserved for firefighting; Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 8 2) Minimum pipe diameter sizes from the water supply to the Fire Department Connection (FDC) shall be as follows: a) 4" for C900 PVC pipe; b) 4" for C906 PE pipe; c) 3"for ductile Iron; d) 3' for galvanized steel. 3) The Fire Department Connection(FDC) shall: a) be made of galvanized steel; b) have a gated valve with 2-1/2 inch,National Standard Thread male fitting and cap; c) be located between 8 ft and 16 ft from the Fire department access. The location shall be approved by the AHJ; d) not be located less than 24 inches, and no higher than 36 inches from finish grade, as measured from the center of the FDC orifice; e) be secure and capable of withstanding drafting operations. Engineered stamped plans may be required; not be located more than 150 feet of the most remote part,but not less than 20 feet, of the structure being protected; g) also comply with section 13.1.3 and 18.2.3.4.6.1 of this code. 4) Commercial buildings requiring a fire flow of 2000gpm shall be provided with a second FDC.Each FDC shall be independent of each other,with each FDC being capable of flowing 500gpm by engineered design standards. The second FDC shall be located in an area approved by the AHJ with the idea of multiple Fire apparatus'conducting drafting operations at once, in mind. 5) Inspection and maintenance shall be in accordance to NFPA 25. 6) The owner or lessee of the property shall be responsible for maintaining the water level, quality, and appurtenances of the system. EXCEPTIONS TO SECTION 18.3.8: 1) Agricultural buildings, storage sheds, and shade houses with no combustible or equipment storage. 2) Buildings less than 800 square feet in size that meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements. Michael Yee October 29, 2019 Page 9 3) For one and two family dwellings, agricultural buildings, storage sheds, and detached garages 800 to 2000 square feet in size, and meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements, the distance to the Fire Department Connection may be increased to 1000 feet. 4) For one and two family dwellings, agricultural buildings, and storage sheds greater than 2000square feet,but less than 3000 square feet and meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements, the distance to the Fire Department Connection may be increased to 500 feet. 5) For buildings with an approved automatic sprinkler system, the minimum water supply required may be modified. If there are any questions regarding these requirements,please contact the Fire Prevention Bureau at(808) 932-2911. DARREN J. ROSARIO Fire Chief CB:ds • tom, �= SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGE .tP�`a Ig•59 u 4? CHAIRPERSON GOVERNOR OF HAWAII BOARD OF LAND AND NA'rURAI,RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE k_ NIANAGEAIENT ndandNafl �: } STATE OF HAWAII ri.4 S�Ie Of Ha"+fDEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST UPFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 C:_4titp October 10,2019 ; ` : <-< set MEMORANDUM —�_ o X r �, J i DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources I �, _Div, of Boating&Ocean Recreation ,: X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry&Wildlife «7 Div. of State Parks ? rn X Commission on Water Resource Management i X Office of Conservation&Coastal Lands X Land Division—Hawaii District X Historic Preservation F M: Russell Y.Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 19-000073) Request: To Allow for Six(6) Lot Subdivision and Related Activities Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Request: RS-15 to RA-5a - LOCATION: North Kohala, Island of Hawaii;TMK: (3) 5-9-001:008 APPLICANT: County of Hawaii on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments on this project which can be found at: 1, hfps:Hhawaiioimt.sharepoint.com/sites/dinr-ld (using the Chrome browser) 2. Username: your Hawaii.gov email address 3. Password: outlook password (if you do not know it, please contact IT by email to reset and get a new password) 4. Click on: Request for Comments,then click on the subject link. 5. If you cannot access the document, please scan this Memo and email to darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.goov to obtain permission to grant you access. Please submit any comments by October 31, 2019. If no response is received by this date, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at dariene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. ( ) We have no objections. We have no comments. ( J} Comments arettache� Signed: L..• f Print Name: ` y S.Vang, Chief Engineer Date: f / b Attachments cc: Central Files fi z::V DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tsuji Ref: Special Management Area Use Permit Application (SMA 19-000073) Request: To Allow for Six (6) Lot Subdivision and Related Activities Change of Zone Application (REZ 19-000237) Request: RS-15 to RA-5a TMK(s): (3) 5-9-001:008 Location: North 1(ohala,Island of Hawaii Applicant: County of Hawaii on behalf of Kohala Shoreline, LLC COMMENTS The rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program(NFIP), Title 44 of the Code of Federal Regulations (44CFR), are in effect when development falls within a Special Flood Hazard Area(high risk areas). State projects are required to comply with 44CFR regulations as stipulated in Section 60.12. Be advised that 44CFR reflects the minimum standards as set forth by the NFIP. Local community flood ordinances may stipulate higher standards that can be more restrictive and would take precedence over the minimum NFIP standards. The owner of the project property and/or their representative is responsible to research the Flood Hazard Zone designation for the project. Flood Hazard Zones are designated on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), which can be viewed on our Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT) (http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT), If there are questions regarding the local flood ordinances,please contact the applicable County NFIP coordinating agency below: o Oahu: City and County of Honolulu, Department of Planning and Permitting (808) 768-8098. o Hawaii Island: County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works (808) 961-8327. .0 Maui/Molokai/Lanai County of Maui,Department of Planning (808) 270-7253. o Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public Works (808)241-4896. Signed: -/7S WG, CHIEF- Ct, T S ANG, ENGINEER Date: C. [This page intentionally left blank] �i f`7 RKoha1aSHRLSubREZSMA 12/04/2019 COUNTY OF HAWAI'I PLANNING DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDATION KOHALA SHORELINE LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ-19-000237) Upon careful review of the request against the guidelines for granting a Change of Zone, the Planning Director is recommending that a favorable recommendation for a Change of Zone from Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) to Residential and Agricultural-5 acres (RA-5a) for a 37.88 acre parcel be forwarded to the County Council. Since this recommendation is made without the benefit of public testimony, the Director reserves the right to modify and/or alter this position. This favorable recommendation is based on the following findings: The applicant,is requesting a change of zone from Single-Family Residential- 15,000 square feet (RS' 15) to Residential and Agricultural-5 acres (RA-5a). The applicant intends to subdivide the property into six (6) lots for the future development of a residential subdivision. There is no County sewer system in the area, so the owners will construct individual septic wastewater systems meeting with the approval of the Department of Health. Subdivision improvements are estimated to cost approximately $4,000,000. The property is a 37.88-acre rectangular parcel located approximately three (3) miles north of Kawaihae Harbor. The property reaches from the shoreline to approximately 160 feet above sea level (asl), makai (seaward) of the State-owned Akoni Pule Highway. The land surface of the project area has been previously disturbed by ranching activities and/or fires, and the existing vegetation is composed of almost entirely two (2) non-native species: kiawe trees and buffel grass. There are no existing structures, landscaping, and/or development on the project parcel other than existing trails and archeological features (i.e.,walls,habitation sites). The Change of Zone request from Single-Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) to Residential Agriculture-5 acres (RA-5) conforms to, among others, the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan Economic and Land Use Elements. 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 proposed Change of Zone will conform to, among others, the goals,policies and standards of the Economic, Environmental and Land Use General Plan Elements: Economic• • Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical, social, and cultural environments of the island of Hawaii. • Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural, and social environment. Environmental: • Define the most desirable use of land within the County that achieves an ecological balance providing residents and visitors the quality of life and an environment in which the natural resources of the island are viable and sustainable. • Maintain and, if feasible, improve the existing environmental quality of the island. • Take positive action to further maintain the quality of the environment and incorporate environmental quality controls either as standards in appropriate ordinances or as conditions of approval. • Enact restrictive land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of wave action. • Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. • Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. -2- Land Use: • Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas • Provide opportunities for the public to fulfill recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. • Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. The requested change of zone conforms to the General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG) Map. 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 parcel is cut into three (3) different LUPAG designations. The mauka (landward)-northern portion of the parcel is within the Extensive Agriculture (ea) designation, the mauka-central and mauka-southern portion are within the Low Density Urban (Idu) designation, while the entire makai (seaward) portion is within the Open (o) designation. For the Idu designation overall residential density may be up to six (6) dwelling units per acre. The applicant's proposal to subdivide the property into six (6) lots is consistent with the low-density urban designation. This designation reflects the existing low-density residential development in this area which includes Kohala Ranch, the Kohala Kai Subdivision, and the Kohala by the Sea Subdivision located nearby. The area is primarily developed with low density residential neighborhoods, while to the north there are large expanses of open and undeveloped State lands. The proposed change of zone would complement the existing land uses in this area by restricting higher density development on a 40-acre coastal parcel and would keep with the low-density designation already well established in this area by designing lots of approximately 5 to 8 acres in size. The property is bounded by the Akoni Pule Highway and the Agricultural-5 acre (A-5a) zoned Kohala Ranch Subdivision to the east (created in the 1980's), the ocean to the west, undeveloped State lands to the north (also zoned A-5a), and the Kohala Kai -3- subdivision to the south which is zoned A-5a. Staff notes that Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit No. 2006-010 was approved to allow for the development of a 5-lot subdivision and related uses, and to make landscaping and other infrastructure improvements on the Kohala Kai property to the south. The proposed request will result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. When considering any request to change the zoning district of a property, the Director shall consider the purpose of the existing and proposed zoning district and the purpose of the Zoning Code and shall recommend a change in zoning only where it would result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. The predominant land use in this area is Agricultural zoned 3- to 5-acre parcels (A-3a & A-5a) in the vicinity of the proposed project site that are developed mainly with residential dwellings and uses. If approved, the proposed residential project on a State Land Use Urban-designated parcel would be in keeping with County and State land use plans and will not detract from important open space area and recreational uses located along the shoreline and on adjacent parcels. For the purpose of promoting health, safety, and the general welfare of the County, the Zoning Code regulates and restricts the height, size of buildings, and other structures, the percentage of a building site that may be occupied, off-street parking, setbacks, size of yards, courts, and other open spaces, the density of population, and the location and use of buildings, structures, and land for trade, industry, residence, or other purposes. In considering the purposes of the Zoning Code in relation to the proposed request, the approval of the request will result in a higher density. If approved, the applicant could build a dwelling on each of the newly created lots, resulting in an increase in the overall unit density within the project site from one (1) home to six (6) homes. In order to ensure that there is sufficient land area to preserve the natural and environmental resources of the project site and to ensure that the region is not overwhelmed by additional residential density, the Planning Director recommends a condition prohibiting a second dwelling unit on each subdivided lot. -4- In considering the request in relation to the surrounding zoning, the request will result in an appropriate land use pattern. The subject property is surrounded on two sides by existing residential subdivisions that are zoned for single-family residential use (i.e., A-5a, A-3a) which will be similar to the proposed subdivision and will allow for the comparable density as the surrounding parcels. The proposed developments' covenants and restrictions on dwelling parameters will also aim to improve the general welfare of the residents in this area by promoting safe, secure, and maintained access to coastal sites. Based on the above information, the proposed request will result in a more appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience, and the general welfare of the County. The proposed request will not burden public agencies to provide utilities and services to the subject property. Access to the subject parcel will be provided via two entrances from Akoni Pule Highway to the subject parcel. Considered cumulatively there will be a negligible effect on average daily traffic,on Akoni Pule Highway, but a slightly more substantial effect with the interaction of left turns at the main entrance of Kohala Ranch. This will be mitigated by the proposed projects intersection improvements, which includes a northbound to westbound left-turn pocket and a southbound deceleration lane. As there is no municipal wastewater system in this area, wastewater will be disposed of by an individual wastewater system, meeting the requirements of the Department of Health. This will be done by the respective landowner in conjunction with the construction of a dwelling. The project will be served with underground water, electrical and telephone service from exiting lines located within a utility easement along Akoni Pule Highway. The majority of the subject parcel is located within an area designated as Flood Zone "X", or an "Area of Minimal Flood Hazard", with the remainder, or coastal portion located within Flood Zone "VE" or "Coastal areas with a 1% or greater chance of flooding and an additional hazard associated with storm waves". As a condition of this recommended ordinance, all development generated runoff shall be disposed of onsite -5- and not be directed toward any adjacent properties, or into the ocean. Moreover, all earthwork and grading shall comply with Hawai'i County Code (HCC) Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control and all development shall comply with HCC Chapter 27, Floodplain Management. All other essential utilities and services are or can be made available to the site. The subject request is not contrary to Chapter 205A, Hawaii Revised Statues, relating to Coastal Zone Management. The property is located entirely within the County's Special Management Area(SMA) and an SMA Use Permit is being pursued for the proposed use. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "DASH" and "Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka'Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing 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: As a result of the archeological studies conducted within the project area, forty (40) historic sites were identified. These include five (5) sites with burials evaluated as significant under criteria d and e, two (2) multi-feature trail sites as evaluated as significant under Criteria d and e, one (1) habitation1ceremonial site evaluated as significant under Criteria c, d, and e; two (2) habitation sites evaluated as significant under Criteria c and d; and thirty (30) additional archeological sites evaluated as significant under Criterion d. Other potential cultural impacts that may result from the proposed project specifically relate to coastal access and use. A detailed cultural-historical background was prepared by Kepa Maly in 200 that included information relative to the general region knows as Kohala Waho, of which the subject parcel is a part. The study suggests that the archeological resources present on the property are best understood within the context of the larger cultural landscape of Kohala Waho. In 2006, Rechtman Consulting prepared a cultural impact assessment for a coastal property to the south, which shares a common history and previous land uses. A number of cultural practitioners were interviewed during the consultation and study process. -6- It was concluded that if the archeological sites were treated in accordance with SHPD approved treatments plans, and access to and along the shoreline was in no way inhibited, there would be no cultural impacts due to the proposed development. • The valued cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: Thirty seven (37) of these archeological sites listed above are considered to be a valued cultural resource and retain the potential to be impacted by,the proposed development. To that end, the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) will be requiring that a revised burial treatment plan, an archeological preservation plan and a data recovery plan be implemented prior to any ground disturbance. • Possible adverse effect or impairment of valued resources: When the 2015 nine- lot subdivision was proposed, site treatments were reconsidered, and plans were made to revise the existing data recovery,preservation, and burial treatment plans. With the reduction of the proposal to six lots, within no development makai of the ala loa/jeep road, recommended treatments have been further revised, and future data recovery, preservation and burial treatment plans will be further updated. In conformance with the recommendations of the latest archeological inventory survey, the burial treatment plan will be updated to reflect the proposed change in land use. Additionally, the 2000 burial plan had noted that any subsequent change in the project's components could require the applicant return to the Hawai'i Island Burial Coun 611 for review of proposed preservation measures. • Feasible actions to protect native Hawaiian rights: In addition to development and implementation of data recovery, preservation and burial treatment plans (which require final review and acceptance by SHPD), the project has involved continuing consultation with native Hawaiian individuals and organizations. Both plans will be implemented prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities. Throughout this process, native Hawaiian individuals and organizations will continue to be consulted in order to ensure that implementation actions are appropriate. -7- Based on the above findings, approval of the Change of Zone request from Single- Family Residential-15,000 square feet (RS-15) to Residential Agriculture-5 acres (RA-5a) would result in an appropriate land use pattern that will further the public necessity and convenience and the general welfare. The accompanying draft bill to amend Section 25-8-7 (North & South Kohala District Zone Map) Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning) of the Hawaii County Code is provided for your favorable consideration. Please note the proposed conditions of approval attached to the draft bill. COUNTY OF HAWAII STATE OF HAWAPI BILL NO. ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-7 (NORTH & SOUTH KOHALA DISTRICT ZONE MAP),ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL— 15,000 SQUARE FEET(RS-15)TO RESIDENTIAL&AGRICULTURAL—FIVE ACRES (RA-5a)AT KAHUA 1 ST,NORTH KOHALA, HAWAII, COVERED BY TAX MAP KEY: 5-9-001:008. BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE COUNTY OF HAWAII: SECTION 1. Section 25-8-7, Article 8, Chapter 25 (Zoning Code) of the Hawaii County Code 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended) is amended to change the district classification of property described hereinafter as follows: The district classification of the following area situated at Kahua l't,North Kohala, Hawaii, shall be Residential and Agricultural—5 acres (RA-5a): Beginning at a point at the North comer of this piece of land,being also the East comer of portion of Government land Pahinahina and on the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road, Section 11, Project No. A-270-01-62, the coordinates of which referred to Hawaii State Plane Coordinate System, Zone I being 453,109.73 feet North and 375,771.74 feet East, and running by true azimuths referred to the Meridian of Government Survey Triangulation Station "PUU PILI" and measured clockwise from South: 1. 322* 00' 30.5" 24.31 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 2. 52' 00' 30.5" 20.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 3. 322' 00' 30.5" 550.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; A- 4. 52' 00' 30.5 10.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 5. 322' 00' 30.5" 100.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 6. 232' 00' 30.511 20.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 7. 322' 00' 30.5" 400.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 8. 232' 00' 30.5" 20.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 9. 322' 00' 30.5" 500.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 10. 52' 00' 30.5" 40.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 11. 322' 00' 30.5" 400.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 12. 232' 00' 30.5" 40.00 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mahukona Road; 13. 322' 00' 30.5" 151.70 feet along the Southwesterly side of Kawaihae Mdhukona Road; 14. 26' 03' 889.95 feet along Lot 9, as shown on Map 4 of Ld. Ct. Cons. 129; Thence along highwater mark(vegetation line) as of January 7, 1993 for the next thirteen (13) courses, the direct azimuths and distances between points on said highwater mark being: 15. 136' 21' 40" 516.93 feet; 16. 155' 00' 250.00 feet; 17. 128' 30' 95.00 feet; -2- 18. 180* 20' 142.80 feet; 19. 93* 00' 104.00 feet; 20. 154' 05' 253.40 feet; 21. 157' 15' 225.20 feet; 22. 57' 40' 106.30 feet; 23. 176* 35' 213.10 feet; 24. 98' 00, 172.85 feet; 25. 105' 20' 83.55 feet; 26. 89' 00, 181.00 feet; 27. 150' 20' 77.35 feet; 28. 206' 50' 35" 1,075.00 feet along portion of the Government land of Pahinahina to the point of beginning and containing an area of 37.880 acres, more or less. 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 1983 (2016 Edition, as amended), 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. -3- SEE ATTACHED CONDITIONS SECTION 3. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance, or the application thereof to any person or circumstance, is held invalid, the invalidity does not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this ordinance are severable. SECTION 4. This ordinance shall take effect upon its approval. INTRODUCED BY: COUNCIL MEMBER, COUNTY OF HAWAII Hawaii Date of Introduction: Date of 1st Reading: Date of 2nd Reading: Effective Date: -4- A-5a .A-5o A-5o 453,109.73'N A-5a Y Q 375.771.74'E SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.-15,000 SQUARE FEET(RSAS)TO _ "PU'UPILP' RESIDENTIAL&AGRICULTURAL-FIVE ACRES(RA-5a) 37.88 ACRES � Q SPL —1 3 � �Q e A-5a A-5o W160 _ 61 ImI'M a A-5o A-5o `W r X rte" ix A-5a Q ' A-5a r � � - h �f- k A-5a P A-5o (P�� A-5❑ Feet 0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 AMENDMENT TO THE TONING CODE AMENDING SECTION 25-8-7 (NORTH & SOUTH KOHALA DISTRICT ZONE MAP) ARTICLE 8, CHAPTER 25 (ZONING) OF THE HAWAII COUNTY CODE 1983 (2016 EDITION, AS AMENDED), BY CHANGING THE DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL - 15,000 SQUARE FEET (RS-15) TO RESIDENTIAL & AGRICULTURAL - FIVE ACRES (RA-5a) AT KAHUA 1 ST, NORTH KOHALA, HAWAII MAP PREPARED BY: TMK:(3)5-9-001:008 COUNTY OF HAWAII, PLANNING DEPARTMENT DATE:September25,2019 EXHIBIT "A" Kohala Shoreline LLC Map: 1413 CKohalaSHnSubUZ 12/04/19 KOHALA SHORELINE LLC CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION (REZ 19-000237) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL A. The applicant(s), their successor(s) or assign(s) shall be responsible for complying with all of the stated conditions of approval. B. The applicant(s),their successor(s) or assign(s) shall be responsible for complying with all conditions as required under Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit Application No. SMA-19-000073. C. The applicant(s), their successor(s) or assign(s) shall be responsible for complying with all applicable County, State, and Federal Laws, codes, rules, regulations, and requirements. D. Prior to the receipt of Final Subdivision Approval, an agreement shall be filed with the Planning Department for review and acceptance that shall acknowledge the owner(s) of all lots utilizing the private water system that potable water from the Department of Water Supply's system is currently not available; and that the Department of Water Supply is not obligated to nor will bear the responsibility of supplying public water to those lots on the private system. The approved agreement shall be recorded with the State Bureau of Conveyances and a copy of its recordation to be filed with the Planning Department within three (3) months of the date of issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. E. Final Subdivision Approval shall be secured within five (5) years from the effective date of the change of zone ordinance. F. Restrictive covenants in the deeds of all proposed lots within the property shall give notice that the terms of the zoning ordinance prohibit the construction of a second dwelling unit and condominium property regimes on each lot. This restriction may be removed by amendment of this ordinance by the County Council. The owner of the property may also, in addition, impose private covenants restricting the number of dwellings. A copy of the proposed covenant(s) to be recorded with the State Bureau of Conveyances shall be submitted to the Planning Director for review and approval prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. A copy of the recorded document shall be filed with the Planning Department upon its receipt from the Bureau of Conveyances. G. In conjunction with Final Subdivision Approval, the applicant shall construct the necessary water distribution pipelines, service laterals, and fire hydrants. H. Access to the subject property from, and any improvements within the Akom Pule Highway shall be constructed meeting with the requirements and approval of the State Department of Transportation. I. All proposed structures will be set back a minimum of 150 feet from Akoni Pule Highway to meet visual impact concerns. J. All proposed structures shall be sited 100 feet from the shoreline mauka of the ala loa/Jeep road. K. All proposed structures shall have a maximum height of 25 feet. L. The applicant shall record with the Bureau of Conveyances metes and bounds measurements for all site preservation easements, shoreline access easements, public access trails, and public access parking located throughout the subject property within six (6)months after Final Subdivision Approval. M. All roadways within the proposed subdivision shall meet with the requirements of the Subdivision Code. Improvements within the proposed subdivision shall include underground utilities for all home sites. N. An advanced treatment unit septic system, such as the Cyclic Biological Treatment (CBT) system, shall be completed by each respective landowner in conjunction with the construction of a dwelling prior to the issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. O. All development-generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a licensed civil engineer and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of a construction permit. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to the construction of any proposed structures on the property. -2- P. The applicant shall comply with the Department of Health's Hawai'i Administrative Rules (HAR) Chapter 11-55, rules regarding Water Pollution Control, which requires an NPDES permit for certain construction activities. Q. A drainage study of the project site, if required, shall be prepared for review and approval by the Department of Public Works, prior to submittal of plans for subdivision review. Drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed in a manner meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to the issuance of Final Subdivision Approval. R. The applicant, its successors or assigns, shall prepare a Solid waste Management Plan prior to securing Final Subdivision Approval for the proposed development within the subject property meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works. A copy of the approved Plan shall be submitted to the Planning Director. S. All earthwork and grading activity shall conform to the Hawai'i County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control, and Chapter 27, Flood Control. T. During all development activities, 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 in the State of Hawai'i. U. The applicant shall submit to the State Historic Preservation Division for review and acceptance a revised Data Recovery Plan, a Preservation Plan, and an appropriate Burial Treatment Plan that meets the requirements of Hawaii Administrative Rules (HRS) §13-278-3, §13-277, and §13-300.33 respectively, prior to subdivision approval. A copy of the accepted report shall be submitted to the Planning Director prior to project commencement. V. In the unlikely event that surface or subsurface historic resources, including human skeletal remains, structural remains (e.g. rock walls, terraces, platforms, etc.), cultural deposits, marine shell concentrations, sand deposits, or sink holes are identified during the development and/or construction work, the applicant will cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional -3- disturbance, and contact the State Historic Preservation Division at (808) 933- 7651. 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 Fees Ordinance. X. An annual progress report shall be submitted to the Panning Director prior to the anniversary date of the approval of the ordinance. The report shall include,but not be limited to, the status of the development and to what extent the conditions of approval are being complied with. This condition shall remain in effect until all of the conditions of approval have been complied with and the Planning Director acknowledges that further reports are not required. Y. An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within the 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). 5. If the applicant(s) should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Director shall submit the applicant's request to the County Council for appropriate action. -4- Z. Should any of the conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Director may initiate rezoning of the area to its original or more appropriate designation. -5- I91 t'l Orn 1- O O O OO D o x N -i-, N O W N w Of _ 0 z 0 rn rn � rn r1'1 zory -v r o� n �r C rn rn 0 > u _ Q o� a, a i C C. 4 A. r _ E 12 v _ Z7 � t r Lt\ (tv PROJECT . • . • ® M o m = C -- -a rr� m ;0 % 0 0 Z 0 r- _7c � m Z M > Z Z -I z m - 00 3: 70 - rV 70 -n m cn GO m C/1 �Jv m < m Z D m C _ m ® _ ® -n ,--n D m D � Z 00 � � nm mDm 70 Zv m i a l , al Ir s 0 h _ o / \ � J N � y D W i a _ w f rn 0 k _ I v' c Y m I ZONINGCOUNTY i I' j2 G� Ir 1�- I� �1 STATE LAND USE BOUNDARY ♦ ■ m - n Z O D r. r = Jr�C 5 -Z-4,L r I GENERAL PLAN� LUPAG MAP t� r - �V •ke iti • ..� -. .e n. .�, u . r 5 n 0 9-. R Y Iq✓ ti' +. DIY., .� 1. In` T ���•�� �N.. 3 r AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH i I i - II 1 DIN CPS m IF1- KOHAI_,1 Rp NCIi FOAQ m �- —of-'r SITE PLAN • ��1.=-L.� OP 0 l7 r _ 7 Z 7 I I N q: r u 1 C a rn r _ , Z rn O = = D t Z - - f Z7 ` i t t� t EXISTING JEEP ROAD i' �i �' s ti's,✓' �`�� — "M , 6r` ae. , , I ' / �e 4 ; SITE Fa �• p • • Zy 77 .i r D fTl �� fir is k T� 4_ F i (v SITE PHOTOS o► r -- ,M � L r = ® Q = (D _ � � � —.'— � r O O �. 7C) rn �Q- 0a r C C Q C n n n n C -+ -+ A -t C C O N Z CD O (D Q � (nD Q N 0- rl € {r 4 O (D N (D Q Q rn ( n m :3O77 Q . . O 0 (D C y � � e? a' rn rn y 0-1 lilt ,t m R, D cD O Q 3 1 r C m rn j0 Q > O k a ° D. c O -, (c) Q (D Q D -0 O SPECIAL CONDITIONS V - • • Ln � Q (D CD C O (D Q (D o co Q (D Q in (D (D cn ] CQ w 3 Q O O Q_ = O Q- Q O Q O ' — O Q -� (D CD n O (D Q O rr o _ -- ', r; --In OinQ 0 (D �' Q (D (D 07Q Q- O '£ Q Wi (D Q- lD CD < Q -. � cn p N Q CD 0 Q 4 a O �7 =� Q (D Q Q_ N Q C in Ln (DLn C C/-) im --+- M — -- --- Q �_ (D D Q Q < n = O -,C p -0 O_ p co O I Q p Q Q cr N. O � cr� C— _U) O Q_ � 'U :_ < o� (D O< Q � � O Q� cnp ::T (T Q -� Q Q y -7 -F —,, —+, � : O O O Q- (D Q- H (D (D SPECIAL • • Cultural ® y0 3 N Q O (—D o m (Q n C CD Q (D (�D Q O (D p fD x (D Q O Q (D T! CD n CD Q --4- T� 3 D � �o CD - mom rn �. �, Q � � cD =r Q O fp Q (D O Q = l� � m - � 0 � (p n �. (D S Q 3 -, � (D (D O Q D Q 07 Q Q Q - Q O n Q O p Q Q Q n 0 (� (� Q m N C N Q n Q Q :O Q Q p CD (D (D n C Q < 0 0. 03 fD n (D " CD Q O C Q _' Q 3 Q (D oO _� c cn =r O C �- N "' O 0 Q - -u n Q Q Q 3 CL 0- QcQp - -o oQ � n -, D lND fD O Q' N n = �' 0, Q 0 � Q � ,< n Q _0 _ Q Q N n p Q (D CQ CQ Q F Q "' O v, p Q n �- n < — p � p rn < n�n -t (D Q Q O (D -+ CD --+- Q p O uo Ln (D O N Q N / I m_ I / I I J -- r1 m I --- �:'i- a,I, y � jf m r Da h it SPECIAL CONDITIONS Access • v V) Q O O D Z (D (D O O C CD 70 --h In O Q 0, C '-0cn < _0n O CD CD . C =7*° = Q i ' Q Q Q - CD D O < -v Q � � Q O D- 3. 0 CD Q Q O Q Q 0 N C .� CD -,, c CD -f O CD -� Q n O N D—Ln 0 v, --+— � Q Q O O� CD O O D j CD 5' CD O - O Q Ln CD Q cn 'Q C O CD Q 4 C c, n CD c Q vQ CD CD (D -�- Q �' D O _0p' � O n Q � n co Q. Q Q7c) Q — � � � Q Q - D — OQ O : H n OQ0 Q C CD'n CD Q Ln O - Q � c :D CSD 4 CD CD O O n D --aQ -h � C 0 (.0 p CD CD = p c N L 0 °o O D 3 Q. � CD c In o In C� O m L, > n n CCD -. O N o (D O Q oo D --- w O h Co c 0 3Q Doo3n D �' p Q (D n CD rn � Ln n (D CD D =� O � N -+" (D0 Q � Q � ° Q CD 3 CD CD 3 0CD 3 --7* --7* c � � 0CD CD3 � Q- � 0- � � n � � o o Q Q Q N � (D -� � CT ;O O N• O O D = -C+ ---7--7,- • • o > -0 = 0 70 -0 -u m > 7- 70 f-- n z > lo n o > z "in < < > c: m > > z z ---1 z � � -n 0n ,o � nT v_ �D 0 R' � oC� ,oZ, ---i I C/') M > 70 M CD m--.4 � -moi c > 0 < W D � r= ov � rnO � OTrn to n CA) 70 70 O rn ---A D Z V n n o 0 m m � = O O z m > Z0 Z � 3 OT rn � rn rn CA) ° � 00 O n 70 r�-4 ---1 --4 y rn D rn D c m 5 O Z rn 0