PD RECOMMENDATION REPORT (PL-REZ-2022-017)

Home

for the proposed three -lot subdivision will be submitted should the change of zone be approved. Since the subject property is not adjacent to the shoreline, it will not be impacted by coastal hazards and beach erosion. There are no identified recreational resources or public access to the shoreline or mountain areas, scenic and open space preserves, coastal ecosystems, marine resources, historic resources in the area. Thus, the proposed request and use of the property will not adversely impact those resources. The request will not have a significant adverse impact to traditional and customary Hawaiian Rights. In view of the Hawaii State Supreme Court's "PASH" and "Ka Pa `akai O Ka Aina" decisions, the issue relative to native Hawaiian gathering and fishing rights must be addressed in terms of the cultural, historical, and natural resources and the associated traditional and customary practices of the site. ■ Investigation of valued resources: An Archeological Survey (AIS) of a 32-acre parcel, including the subject property, was completed by Hammatt et al. in 1987 and an archaeological field inspection (FI) report titled, Archaeological Field Inspection Letter Report for Nakoa Proposed Rezone, Kapala `alaea 2nd Ahupua `a, North Kana District, Island of Hawai `i; TAIK (3) 7-7-08: 062 (Scheffler, May 2022). ■ The valued cultural, historical, and natural resources found in the rezoning area: The Hammatt et al. 1987 survey identified 51 historic properties, 15 of which are located on the subject property, including a burial, a platform, six terraces, five agricultural complexes, and two previously identified sites. Two sites were assessed as significant under criterion d and were recommended for no further work and none of the sites were recommended for preservation. However, according to SHPD, the Hammatt survey does not meet current standards for an archeological inventory survey as defined in Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) 13-276 and SHPD requested that an archeological field inspection (FI) be conducted of the subject property to determine if undocumented historic properties exist in the project area. Subsequently, the applicant provided an FI report which identified one historic property, an agricultural complex, assessed as significant under criterion d and recommended for data recovery. Additionally, the FI report indicated that a historic house structure and auxiliary shed, both damaged by fire and cleared in W