My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
PD BACKGROUND REPORT (PL-SLU-2022-004 & PL-REZ-2022-019)
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
Leeward/Windward Planning Commission
>
Board Packets
>
*Background/Recommendation Reports (June 2020-Sept 2022)
>
2022
>
2022-06-16 Leeward (CANCELLED DUE TO LACK OF QUORUM)
>
Item #4 Amy Hagen-Cowell Trust (PL-REZ-2022-000019)
>
PD BACKGROUND REPORT (PL-SLU-2022-004 & PL-REZ-2022-019)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/7/2022 10:34:14 AM
Creation date
6/7/2022 10:42:08 AM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
182
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
U. Fauna Resources <br /> Although there was no professional survey conducted of the faunal <br /> resources of the site, the applicant does not believe that rare or <br /> endangered faunal resources are likely to be found within or <br /> proximate to the subject site. This is due to the already partially <br /> disturbed state of the subject area and its immediate surrounding <br /> area. <br /> Nonetheless, because of the introduced vegetation and location of <br /> the property, the faunal resources should be somewhat typical of <br /> other developed areas. One may thus find bird species such as <br /> the Spotted Dove, Japanese White-eye, House Finch, Common <br /> Myna, and the like. Domestic animals such as cats and dogs, and <br /> other animals like rats and mongoose are also common. <br /> None of these are endangered animals. As such, it is unlikely that <br /> the development of this property would cause any adverse faunal <br /> impacts. <br /> Flora Resources <br /> Similarly, no commissioned botanical survey was done of the <br /> subject site. Based on field work done in conjunction with an <br /> Archaeological Inventory Survey, the authors noted the site had <br /> been bulldozed in the past and covered with secondary growth <br /> vegetation. <br /> The authors found Guinea grass and other introduced plant species <br /> such as the African tulip, autograph tree, Christmas berry, <br /> jacaranda, banyan, mango and kukui. There were also some <br /> native species such as the ohi'a. <br /> These plants are typical of this area. None of these were <br /> considered threatened or endangered by the US Fish and Wildlife <br /> Service. Thus, it can be reasonably argued that development of <br /> this area is not expected to have a significant negative impact on <br /> the botanical resources. <br /> F. Archaeological Resources <br /> An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was conducted of the <br /> subject site by Haun and Associates. (Appendix A) The AIS <br /> identified four (4) historic sites. Three (3) were wall sites and the <br /> other was a complex consisting of 23 features, such as enclosures, <br /> wails, pits, and concrete pads. These yielded "information <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.