Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPD Background Report COH-Parks & Rec (PL-SMA-2023-031 & PL-SSV-2023-003)BMilohiSMAS SV-6/8/23 COUNTY OF HAWAI`I PLANNING DEPARTMENT BACKGROUND REPORT COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION SHORELINE SETBACK VARIANCE APPLICATION (PL-SSV-2023-000003) SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION (PL-SMA-2023- 000031) DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION has submitted applications for a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit and a Shoreline Setback Variance to allow facility improvements and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park on 1.41 acres of land situated within the Special Management Area. The subject property is located at the coastal village of Miloli`i at 89-1151 Miloli`i Road, approximately 5 miles from the Miloli`i Road intersection with Hawaii Belt Road, Anapuka and Ho`opuloa, South Kona District, Hawaii, TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001. APPLICANT'S REQUEST 1. Request: The County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation is requesting a Special Management Area (SMA) Use Permit for its recreational facility improvements that are located at the Miloli`i Beach Park on approximately 1.41 acres of land located along the shoreline within the coastal village of Miloli`i. The park currently contains an unpermitted 80 ft by 40 ft covered pavilion, a basketball/volleyball court, parking area, a restroom, a water tank, a pump house, and firepits. The overall improvements that are being requested under SMA Use Permit (PL-SMA- 2023-000031) include the following: • Replacement of the existing pavilion; • Replacement of the existing comfort station; • Replacement of the non -potable water storage with a new potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; • Improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible; • Improvements of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible; • Reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence; • Construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence; • Designation of a boat turnaround area; and • Installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. In 2019 the Board of Land and Natural Resources certified the shoreline for the subject property along the makai edge of the existing seawalls that surround the subject property. While the proposed improvements aim to remove and reconstruct the existing pavilion, the pavilion as well as new walkway improvements and a new boat turnaround area will be located within the minimum 40-foot shoreline setback area and therefore the Department of Parks and Recreation has concurrently applied for a Shoreline Setback Variance (SSV) for these improvements. The following improvements are being requested concurrently under the Shoreline Setback Variance application (PL-SSV-2023-000003): • Replacement of the existing pavilion • Improvements of the walkways connecting the comfort station. • Designation of a boat turnaround area. The Department of Parks and Recreation has also provided various alternatives to the project located within the Final Environmental Assessement (FEA) and ultimately selected the Site Plan (Figure 3) as shown in the FEA. Additionally, Figure 8 of the FEA shows a complete list of the proposed improvements to the Miloli`i Beach Park while including the subject property's relation to the shoreline and the minimum 40-foot shoreline setback line and VE flood zone for the area. 2. Project Objective: The proposed action aims to satisfy the County's obligation of its federally mandated Transition Plan (relating to ADA upgrades at County facilities), while retaining and improving the ability to effectively maintain the park and ensuring long-term use and serviceability. 3. Project Timetable and Cost: The current estimated cost of the improvements is $1,750,000. The project would be initiated after the granting of all of the necessary permits. 4. Supportive Information: The applicant has submitted the attached in support of the request: (Planning Department Exhibit 1 — SMA Use Permit Application dated January 25, -2- 2023; Planning Department Exhibit 2 - Shoreline Setback Variance Application dated February 27, 2023; Planning Department Exhibit 3 - FEA/FONSI dated December 2022) 5. Landowner: The landowner of the subject parcel is the State of Hawaii under Executive Order #2435 to the County of Hawaii for recreational purposes. 6. Chapter 343, HRS: The proposed improvements are subject to the requirements of Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes, regarding Environmental Impact Statements because work is proposed on County/State land using County funding. A Final Environmental Assessment (FEA) was prepared for the project. A Notice of Finding of Significant Impact (FONSI) was published in the February 2023 issue of the OEQC Environmental Notice. STATE AND COUNTY PLANS 7. State Land Use District: Conservation. (General and Special Subzones). 8. County Zoning: Open. 9. General Plan LUPAG Designation: Open. 10. Kona Community Development Plan (CDP): The Kona Community Development Plan was adopted by the Hawaii County Council by Ordinance No. 08-131 on September 25, 2008. The project site is located outside of the Kona Urban Area (KUA). 11. Special Management Area: The entire project parcel is located along the shoreline and within the Special Management Area (SMA) which is a part of the Coastal Zone Management Program and regulated by the County. 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. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA 12. Project Site: The County Park known as the Miloli`i Beach Park is approximately 1.41- acres in size. The project area is relatively flat with slopes ranging from 0 to 1.5% generally sloped toward the southern portion of the project site. Elevations on the project site range from 6.7 to 7.7 feet above Mean Sea Level (MSL). Structures on the subject property consist of recreational facilities and associated infrastructure including one (1) covered pavilion that was built by the community without a building permit, one (1) comfort station, camping area, basketball/volleyball court and an existing parking area. 13. Surrounding Zoning and Land Uses: The zoning of the subject property and surrounding -3- properties is Open (Open) including the Hau`oli Kamana`o Congregational Church located to the east and a residence located to the south. 14. U.S.D.A. Soil Type: Punaluu-lava flows complex, 2 to 10 percent slopes. The Punalu`u series consist of well -drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava bedrock. These soils are gently sloping to moderately steep. They are on uplands at an elevation ranging from near sea level to 1,000 feet and received from 20 to 50 inches of rainfall annually. 15. Land Study Bureau's Soil Rating: "E" or "Very Poor". 16. Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH): The project site is unclassified on the ALISH map. 17. Flood Zone (FIRM): According to the Department of Public Works (DPW) Engineering Division, the subject parcel is currently designated as Zone X, VE and AE on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). Zone "X," is an area determined by FEMA to be an area outside the 500-year floodplain. The area along the coastline is within Zone "VE", which is an area exposed to coastal flood with velocity hazard (wave action) and where base flood elevations have been determined. A narrow area located to the north of the subject property is within Zone "AE," which is a Special Flood Hazard Area that corresponds to the 100-year floodplains that are determined in the Flood Insurance Study by detailed methods. According to the University of Hawaii Sea Level Rise exposure area mapping program SLR-Xa, the exposure area for 3.2 feet of sea level rise or 3.2 feet of passive flooding is located along the shoreline. (Planning Department Exhibit 4 — Sea Level Rise Exposure Area Map dated August 2023) The entire parcel is located within the Tsunami Evacuation Zone. 18. Flora/Faunal Resources: There were no professional surveys conducted of the floral or faunal resources for the subject property, however the applicant does not believe that any rare or endangered floral or faunal resources are likely to be found within the subject property due to the long -developed use of the subject property for park activities. According to the State Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) there are several state -listed species that could occur at or in the vicinity of the subject property including the Hawaiian Hoary Bat (`Ope`ape`a), Hawaiian Duck (Koloa Maoli), Hawaiian Coot (`Alae ke`oke`o), Hawaiian Goose (Nene), Hawaiian Sea Turtle (Honu), Hawaiian Monk Seal (Ilio holo i ka), Hawaiian Hawk (`Io), Blackburn's Sphinx Moth, Hawksbill Sea Turtle, Hawaiian yellow -faced bee, Anchialine pool shrimp, Hawaiian -4- Damselflies and other seabirds. DOFAW provided recommendations to mitigate impacts on these species. 19. Archaeological/Cultural Resources: Haun & Associates prepared an Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) for the project area in August 2022 that identified three (3) archaeological sites within the project area. The three sites include two walls and a basketball/volleyball court. The three sites are associated with the remnants of the Miloli `i School. The AIS assessed all sites in the area as significant under criterion "d" (yielding information important for research on history or prehistory). Based on the documentation of the sites in the AIS, no further work was recommended and there were no sites identified within the project area that are listed on the State or National Registers of Historic Places. The AIS was submitted to the State Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) for review and acceptance and in a letter dated July 15, 2022, SHPD determined that no historic properties were to be affected by the proposed project. A Cultural Impact Analysis for the proposed improvements to the Miloli `i Beach Park Improvements was not completed. The Applicant did however provide a September 2006 Cultural Impact Assessment for the South Kona Watershed Irrigation System Project and a February 2012 Cultural Impact Assessment for the Miloli`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center with their SMA Use Permit Application and Shoreline Setback Variance Application. The analysis of the previous assessments concluded that there was no indication of any kind that the overall projects had any natural resources necessary to or currently being used by native Hawaiian cultural practitioners exercising traditional and customary access and use rights for any purposes or by individuals of any other cultural affiliation for any traditional cultural purposes. Conversely, both assessments concluded that the proposed projects at the time would likely benefit the area and the community's cultural resources and practices. Additionally, in efforts to ensure the local community was involved in discussions regarding the proposed beach park accessibility improvements, the Department of Parks and Recreation scheduled community meetings at Miloli`i Beach Park on October 18, 2019, and November 3, 2019. Due to the circumstances of COVID-19, a third meeting was delayed until May 16, 2021, to follow-up on community concerns. A frequently identified concern was that the project was changing the park with the intention of increasing tourist visitation. -5- As communicated at the community meetings, the proposed project was initiated to meet the federal mandate for ADA compliance; the project would not make any changes to the existing uses of the beach park, and the pavilion would remain under control of the community. The intended use of the park is for the Miloli `i Village community. An additional informal meeting on June 21, 2022, with park staff and several members of the community identified some specific design needs for the new PV electrical system, the need for a service window at the pavilion, and insulation in the pavilion storage area to minimize heat build-up. The Department of Parks and Recreation will continue to work with the community during implementation of the accessibility improvements project. 20. Coastal Ecosystems/Anchialine Ponds: The proposed improvements will not occur within sensitive wetland areas and pristine anchialine ponds that harbor endangered birds and rare aquatic invertebrates. The actions will not produce erosion or sedimentation and will not otherwise involve pollution of water. No disturbance of marine mammals or reptiles will occur as part of construction or use by parkgoers. 21. Recreational/Scenic and Open Space Resources: The state-owned park is a public property currently under Executive Order # 2435 to the County of Hawaii for recreational purposes that is open to the public. On a daily basis the park is used for sightseeing, picnicking, sports, community gatherings, community library and education center, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. The property is situated along the shoreline and the overall area of Miloli`i has been designated as one of the Natural Beauty Sites in the District of South Kona within the General Plan (2005). 22. Traffic: Given the facilities are being replaced and not expanded at the park, a traffic impact analysis report was not performed. According to the applicant, construction of the proposed project could result in short-term increases in traffic. 23. Public Access: The park is public property currently under the control of the County of Hawaii that is fully open to the public but is currently limited without ADA access improvements. Shoreline access for fishing and surfing is present by walking through the park. The proposed improvements will aim to improve access for all public visitors to the park and do not affect public access in any way. PUBLIC UTILITIES AND SERVICES 24. Access: The subject property is currently accessed via Miloli `i Road. Miloli`i Road is a In paved, steep, winding, two-lane County maintained road. The park access will be gated and will remain open during normal park hours and closed at night. 25. Water: According to the applicant, there is no County or private water system available to the subject property. Water for the park is currently hauled in by privately operated water supply trucks and is non -potable to only be used for flushing and washing hands. The proposed project includes the demolition of the existing non -potable water storage and the construction of a new potable water storage system, including a new water tank and booster pump(s), for the new comfort station. Potable water would be delivered by privately operated water supply trucks. 26. Wastewater: There is no municipal sewer system in Miloli`i. According to the applicant, the existing park is currently serviced by an Individual Wastewater System (IWS) comprised of a septic tank and leach field. Residents of the area have expressed concerns over high bacteria levels around the beach park. An IWS Assessment and Feasibility Study for Miloli `i Beach Park as shown in Appendix D of the FEA was completed in August 2020. In general, the waters surrounding Miloli`i Beach Park are being negatively impacted by enterococcus. Samples near the entrance to the beach park and pavilion were found to have the highest enterococcus levels, which exceeded the limit for recreation waters. The shallow marine cove fronting the beach park was predicted to have the highest bacteria levels due to its proximity to the existing leach field. However, samples from this location were found to have the lowest enterococcus levels, well below the limits allowed for recreational waters. Additionally, a dye test was conducted and originated at the comfort station's septic tank and no dye was observed in the adjacent marine waters through the investigation period. The study concluded that the IWS appears to be adequate for low to normal usage periods, however it may be undersized for the estimated weekend use. Further investigation and testing during high usage periods is recommended, in addition to increasing the frequency of pumping from once every three months to once a month. The study also provided options to the Department of Parks and Recreation on other possible wastewater systems. At this time the Department of Parks and Recreation will provide a holding tank for toilet waste while continuing to use the existing IWS for the sink water. (Planning Department Exhibit 5 — Email from Applicant dated August 9, 2023) 27. Solid Waste: There is no municipal waste collection service in the County. Solid waste will -7- be handled by County Parks Maintenance Division. 28. Essential Services and Utilities: Electrical and telephone services are not available to the subject property. There is a Hawaii County Police station located approximately 40 miles north of the subject property and a police station in Na`alehu that is approximately 30 miles south of the project site. There is a volunteer fire station located within Miloli`i Village. The Kona Community Hospital is approximately 30 miles from the project site. AGENCIES' AND ORGANIZATIONS' COMMENTS 29. Department of Public Works — Engineering Division (Planning Department Exhibit 6 — June 20, 2023 Memo) 30. Department of Water Supply (Planning Department Exhibit 7 — June 2, 2023 Memo) 31. Department of Environmental Management (Planning Department Exhibit 8 — June 16, 2023 Memo) 32. Fire Department (Planning Department Exhibit 9 — May 19, 2023 Memo) 33. State Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (Planning Department Exhibit 10 — June 15, 2023 Memo) 34. Department of Health (Planning Department Exhibit 11 — May 24, 2023 Memo) 35. State Department of Land and Natural Resources — Engineering Division (Planning Department Exhibit 12 — June 5, 2023 Memo) 36. State Department of Land and Natural Resources — Office of Coastal and Conservation Lands (Planning Department Exhibit 13 — June 5, 2023 Memo) 37. State Department of Land and Natural Resources — Division of Forestry and Wildlife (Planning Department Exhibit 14 — June 14, 2023 Memo) AGENCIES - NO COMMENTS/ NO CONCERNS 38. Police Department; State Department of Land and Natural Resources — Land Division. APPLICANT'S RESPONSE TO AGENCIES' COMMENTS 39. Department of Public Works — Building Division; National Park Service; US Fish and Wildlife. PUBLIC COMMENTS 40. The Department has not received any comments or objections from the general public or adjacent landowners on the subject application as of the time of this writing. in SPECIAL MANAGEMENT AREA USE PERMIT APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I PLANNING COMMISSION (Type or legibly print the requested information) APPLICANT(S): _JeffOchi tCounty of'Hawai'i, Department of'Parks and Recreation) APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: L' DATE: a/ ADDRESS: 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo HI96720 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST (if'not owner): PHONE: (Bus.) (Res.) (Email) REQUEST: SMA Major Permit apVroval for site improvements at Miloli'i Beach Park TAX MAP KEY: (3) 8-9-004:001 ZONING: Open District SIZE OF PROPERTY / AREA OF REQUESTED USE: 1.41 Acres 1 I.ANDOWNER(S): County of' Hawai'i, Department of' Parks and Recreation FEE SIMPLE LANDOWNER(S) WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION (may he provided by letter with the below statement included): AGENT: Korey Johnson AGENT ADDRESS: 1953 S. Beretania Street, PFI-A _ Honolulu. HI 96826 PHONE: (BLIS3,f8") 369-8214 (Res.) DATE: DATE: trint�nc�n%nl)F+rnais�nninaPrinn rom I'Email' '�J v.uaova.`w vv .. u�u uFj.♦ Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Jeff Ochi COPIES: Korey Johnson Planning Qepi. Exhibit 1 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Telephone: (808) 941-8853 1953 South Beretania Street, PH -A Fax: (808) 945-9299 Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 www.bowengineering.com January 24, 2023 Subject: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project SMA Application (Supplemental Information) Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. is submitting this application on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation. The purpose of this document is to provide relevant project information for the Miloli`i Beach Park project, located within the Special Management Area (SMA). Included in this letter are responses to the SMA Permit Application requirement for anticipated impacts of the project. A Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact (FEA/FONSI) is also being uploaded to the online Electronic Processing and Information Center (EPIC) for additional information and reference. A. Miloli`i Beach Park is located at the coastal village of Miloli`i in the South Kona District in the southwestern region of Hawaii Island. Miloli`i is considered one of the most traditional fishing villages in Hawaii. The existing park site includes approximately 1.41 acres identified as Tax Map Key (TMK): (3) 8-9-004:001. Existing facilities at the Miloli`i Beach Park include a pavilion, restrooms serviced by an existing Individual Wastewater System (IWS) comprised of a septic tank and leach field, a basketball court, paved parking, a non -potable water system including a water tank, shed, picnic area, and designated camping area. According to the Department of Parks and Recreation, the existing Miloli`i Beach Park pavilion was built (unpermitted) before 2006. The park pavilion, sometimes referred to as the Miloli`i Halau, is an open-air building, approximately 80 feet by 40 feet, with multiple picnic benches under the covered building. There is existing lighting in the pavilion. On a daily basis the park is used for sightseeing, picnicking, sports, community gatherings, community library and education center, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. A charter school uses the pavilion frequently and has an ongoing research project at the park in the marine waters. The coastal portion of the park includes a rocky beach and a large tidal pool. The area near the beachfront is used as a campsite, and campers typically park their vehicle on the dirt beyond the parking area closer toward the beach. Based on camping permits for the site, a maximum of 22 campers per night are permitted. B. The proposed project includes: • replacement of the existing pavilion (with storage and electrical room) with proper permits to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the non -potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; • improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible; • improvement of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible; Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project SMA Application January 24, 2023 • reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence; • construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence; designation of a boat turnaround area; and, • installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. The proposed action includes demolishing both the existing pavilion and comfort station. The pavilion use would remain under community control. Parking would include 16 total stalls, including 12 standard stalls and 4 ADA accessible stalls (including 1 van accessible stall). A boat turnaround area adjacent to the pavilion would be paved with "No Parking" signage. The existing solar panels (PV system) on the pavilion would be removed and salvaged and replaced with a new PV/battery power system. The proposed project includes lighting for the restrooms and area lighting along the accessible paths. Security lighting for the pavilion would run off of the PV system. Solar tubes for natural lighting may be considered in the comfort station. A maximum of 22 campers per night are currenty allowed with permits. With implementation of the improvments, camping rules and reservations would remain the same as those existing. Two trees would be removed with construction of the proposed improvements. Excavated materials from construction would be separated and reused on the project site, as possible. Following completion of the proposed improvements, all unpaved areas to be graded would be grassed or hydroseeded. Any remaining construction waste would be removed from the project site. New signage would include accessible parking signs in the parking area and accessible signs for the restrooms. The County aims to provide ongoing beach parking and access during construction of the proposed improvements. Temporary parking during construction would likely be onsite or along Miloli`i Road. C. There would be a short-term increase in dust during demolition and soil erosion during construction since grading associated with construction of the proposed facilities would result in the exposure of bare soil to potential erosion. All earthwork and grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. The proposed action includes a site -specific Best Management Practices (BMP) plan developed as part of the project to minimize erosion and sedimentation during construction. With implementation of these BMPs, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact due to soil erosion or off -site sediment transport. Page 2 of 6 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 40* Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility IV SMA Application Improvement Project January 24, 2023 No long-term or cumulative adverse effects to topography or soils are anticipated with implementation of the proposed action. Implementation of the proposed accessibility improvements could temporarily increase noise levels during construction. There would be no long-term increase in noise during project operations since the project accessibility improvements would not generate additional traffic and associated noise. The proposed project would introduce minimal additional lighting to the project site for the restrooms and area lighting along accessible paths. Because of the isolated nature of the project site and unlit night sky ideal for nighttime star visibility, these lights could produce nighttime glare effects. Since the proposed project consists of accessibility improvements and replacement of existing uses at the Miloli`i Beach Park, the proposed project would not significantly change the scenic and visual character of the surrounding area. D. No significant long-term or cumulative adverse environmental effects would results from the project. The proposed improvements would not curtail the range of beneficial uses at the project site. The project would increase the range of beneficial uses of the environment by improving existing beach park facilities and accessibility to these recreational resources. With implementation of accessibility improvements, recreational access for disabled visitors to the park would be improved. E. Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed accessibility improvements would not be constructed and existing park features would not be reconstructed. As a result, the present conditions within the project area would predominantly continue into the future, with some members of the community experiencing limited or difficult access to park facilities. Also, the basketball court and pavilion would remain in disrepair and would not meet County permit requirements. This alternative would not meet any of the identified project objectives. Preferred Alternative 1: Proposed Action The beneficial impacts of the proposed project include the increased accessibility to the park offered by improved parking lot including ADA spaces, connecting ADA accessible walks and ramps to park facilities for greater accibility from feature to feature, improvement and replacement of existing facilities to meet ADA guidelines and County permit requirements, and the addition of a new children's play apparatus. Page 3 of 6 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project POND r 55f II '1 EXIST WE LEACH FIELD 70 RSMN A, EXIST COMFORT STATION TO BE DEMOLISHED t + 5� FIST CGURTS 0 i�TO BE RESURFACE} `l • ``'' NEW k W ii Irfi"1�•��Uh, u _5- MEMEN1 rQ jE ULM;UShL) 44x FR S1 --4 TO F71LACCD �A7FP Y EM! 7 ` 1 SMA Application January 24, 2023 I I r 5-41 A 7F Au.'FSSIF. F CON zEIE WALKIN4 f �- S J LXIE' CCMuJNIIY __._-T-1 l G`.4711P.`A R.)V - - - - L _ISW_7 CuML`I7 YJ h':II If 3, 4 I T , BOAT TURNAROUND ii AREA g k�, - L IMITS OF NF.YV J -V AC PAVEMEP GRA�Hf+ 4 do Figure 1 Alternative 1 Conceptual Site Plan Alternative 2: Alternate Comfort Station Location Alternative 2 would include a new comfort station and new potable water system sited closer to the camp sites (Figure 2). The new comfort station location would require the installation of new septic tank(s) and associated sewer piping, though the existing leach field would be reused. The septic tank and sewer piping would be designed in accordance with the State Department of Health requirements. Under the proposed Alternative 2, the Page 4 of 6 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SMA Application Improvement Project January 24, 2023 new potable water system and replacement pavilion would be located within the Shoreline Setback Area, and the pavilion would remain in the flood zone. This alternative was eliminated based on community feedback that the comfort station location closer to the campsites is not desired, and the original location is preferred. POND — 10—FT 'NIOE ACCESSIBLE CCHCRM WALKWAY & DRIVEAELE BEACH ACCESS NEW POTAR—E WATER SYSTEra � NEW SEFTIC TANK AND NEW COFFORT - SEWERUNE TO EXIST 5TATION � LEACI- FIELD EXIST I'A'S LEACH FIELD T& RE441 ti GA. il EXIST 00VRTS TO &t RECONSTRUCTED a ° k}d' R Sol kXITcWU`Ak3JL YIAfER SYS1EM TO K REPI ACFD i EXIST COMFORT STATION TO BE OEMCLISHEC EXIST PAVEMENT To K DEMOLISHED EXIST COMMUNITY P.aYIUON TO BE DEMOL15HED RE'LACED LIMITS OF NEW � —�{ AC PAVEMENT kI G.RAPHIC SCALE: 40 20 a - 40 sG I Figure 2 Alternative 2 Conceptual Site Plan Page 5 of 6 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SMA Application Improvement Project January 24, 2023 F. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts, the project would include site -specific Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be implemented during project construction. A list of site -specific BMPs are outlined in the FEA/FONSI attached to the application packet. G. The proposed project is not anticipated to involve an irrevocable commitment, or loss and destruction or any natural or cultural resource. Anticipated impacts of the proposed project on valued cultural, historical or natural resources is not expected. An Archaeological Inventory Survey was completed for the project and accepted by the State Historic Preservation Division. Attached to the EPIC application are these two documents with more specific information regarding: a. The identity and scope of valued cultural, historical, or natural resources in the area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the 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 to reasonably protect any valued cultural, historical or natural resources, including any existing traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights. Anticipated impacts of the proposed development on the following in relationship to the objectives and policies as contained in Chapter 205A, HRS, and the SMA Guidelines are addressed in detail in the FEA/FONSI and include discussion regarding: a. Recreational resources; b. Historic resources; c. Scenic and Open Space resources; d. Coastal Ecosystems; e. Economic Uses; and f. Coastal Hazards The project site is along the shoreline and is entirely within the SMA. All assessments of anticipated impacts were performed in a manner to take into account the project location and public sensitivity to the existing site. The FEA/FONSI prepared according to Chapter 343, HRS, is attached in the EPIC application site for reference. This was supposed to be published in the January 23, 2023 edition of the Environmental Notice, however an oversight was made by the Environmental Review Program, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, leading to a delay in publication (now set for February 8, 2023). Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or need any other documents to support your review and approval. William F. Bow, M.S. Environmental Director Direct: 808-369-8217 wbow@bowengineering.com Korey L. Johnson, M.S. Environmental Project Manager Direct: 808-369-8214 kjohnson@bowengineering.com Page 6 of 6 SHORELINE SETBACK VARIANCE APPLICATION COUNTY OF HAWAI`I PLANNING COMMISSION (Type or legibly print the requested information) Jeff Ochi (County of Hawai `i, Department of Parks and Recreation) APPLICANT(S): i7 APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE: DATE: k `Z-7 ADDRESS: 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo, HI 96720 LIST APPLICANT'S INTEREST (if not owner): PHONE: (Bus.) (Res.) (Email) REQUEST: Shoreline Setback Variance approval for site improvements at Miloli`i Beach Park TAX MAP KEY(S) (3) 8-9-004:001 ZONING: Open District SIZE OF PROPERTY / AREA OF REQUESTED USE: 1.41 Acres LANDOWNER(S): County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation FEE SIMPLE LANDOWNER(S) WRITTEN AUTHORIZATION (may be provided by letter with the below statement included): AGENT: Korev Johnson AGENT ADDRESS: 1953 S .Beret a na Street, PH -A Honolulu, HI 96826 PHONE: (Bus.) (808) 369-8214 (Res.) DATE: DATE: (Email) kjohnson@bowengineering.com Please indicate to whom original correspondence and copies should be sent. ORIGINAL: Jeff Ochi COPIES: Korey Johnson Planning Dept. Exhibit 2 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Telephone: (808) 941-8853 1953 South Beretania Street, PH -A Fax: (808) 945-9299 Honolulu, Hawaii 9682644 www.bowengineering.com April 6, 2023 Subject: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Shoreline Setback Variance Application (Supplemental Information) Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. is submitting this application on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation. The purpose of this document is to provide relevant project information for the Miloli`i Beach Park project for the Shoreline Setback Variance (SSV) application. Included in this letter are responses to the SSV Permit Application requirement (item 93 through 98) for anticipated impacts of the project. A filing fee of $500 has been paid via EPIC (item 91) and the signed application is also in EPIC (item 92). A Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact (FEA/FONSI) and other requested documents are being uploaded to the online Electronic Processing and Information Center (EPIC) for additional information and reference. Item 93: A written narrative, including the following background information (A-N) on the subject property. A. A Final Environmental Assessment consistent with the requirements of Chapter 343, HRS was submitted to the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, Environmental Review Program on January 24, 2023 for publication on February 8, 2023 in The Environmental Notice. This document is uploaded into EPIC. B. The proposed project includes: • replacement of the existing pavilion (with storage and electrical room) with proper permits to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the non -potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; • improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible; • improvement of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible; • reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence; • construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence; designation of a boat turnaround area; and, • installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. The proposed action includes demolishing both the existing pavilion and comfort station. The pavilion use would remain under community control. Parking would include 16 total stalls, including 12 standard stalls and 4 ADA accessible stalls (including 1 van accessible stall). A boat turnaround area adjacent to the pavilion would be paved with "No Parking" signage. Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 The existing solar panels (PV system) on the pavilion would be removed and salvaged and replaced with a new PV/battery power system. The proposed project includes lighting for the restrooms and area lighting along the accessible paths. Security lighting for the pavilion would run off of the PV system. Solar tubes for natural lighting may be considered in the comfort station. A maximum of 22 campers per night are currenty allowed with permits. With implementation of the improvments, camping rules and reservations would remain the same as those existing. Two trees would be removed with construction of the proposed improvements. Excavated materials from construction would be separated and reused on the project site, as possible. Following completion of the proposed improvements, all unpaved areas to be graded would be grassed or hydroseeded. Any remaining construction waste would be removed from the project site. New signage would include accessible parking signs in the parking area and accessible signs for the restrooms. The County aims to provide ongoing beach parking and access during construction of the proposed improvements. A portion of the concrete walkway to the campground and additional paving would be located within the Shoreline Setback Area, which is the purpose of this Shoreline Setback Variance application. C. Miloli`i Beach Park is located at the coastal village of Miloli`i in the South Kona District in the southwestern region of Hawaii Island. Miloli`i is considered one of the most traditional fishing villages in Hawaii. The existing park site includes approximately 1.41 acres identified as Tax Map Key (TMK): (3) 8-9-004:001. Existing facilities at the Miloli`i Beach Park include a pavilion, restrooms serviced by an existing Individual Wastewater System (IWS) comprised of a septic tank and leach field, a basketball court, paved parking, a non -potable water system including a water tank, shed, picnic area, and designated camping area. According to the Department of Parks and Recreation, the existing Miloli`i Beach Park pavilion was built (unpermitted) before 2006. The park pavilion, sometimes referred to as the Miloli`i Halau, is an open-air building, approximately 80 feet by 40 feet, with multiple picnic benches under the covered building. There is existing lighting in the pavilion. On a daily basis the park is used for sightseeing, picnicking, sports, community gatherings, community library and education center, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. A charter school uses the pavilion frequently and has an ongoing research project at the park in the marine waters. The coastal portion of the park includes a rocky beach and a large tidal pool. The area near the beachfront is used as a campsite, and Page 2 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 campers typically park their vehicle on the dirt beyond the parking area closer toward the beach. Based on camping permits for the site, a maximum of 22 campers per night are permitted. D. The Kona Community Development Plans (CDPs) covers the geographic districts of North Kona, reaching nearly to Waikoloa Village, and South Kona, including the Community of Miloli`i. The Kona CDP sets forth a standard of excellence in design, operation, and maintenance, and specifically prioritizes upgrading and maintenance of Miloli`i Beach Park: Policy PUB-7.2: Excellence in Maintenance. If the community and responsible public workers cannot stand next to the public facility with pride, then that is a call to action for both the community and the responsible public agency. Action PUB-7.2c: Provide for upgrading and maintenance to the public facilities in critical need of attention: ii. Maintain parks and public facilities in remote areas, such as Miloli`i. The proposed project would replace the existing pavilion to meet permitting standards and provide accessibility improvements to the park, among other improvements. These upgrades are essential to meet ADA requirements and provide equitable access to the park amenities. E. The project area is located within the County's Special Management Area (SMA), as regulated under HRS, Chapter 205A. Compliance with the State's environmental review process is required. No federal funding is anticipated for Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement project, and would not be subject to the environmental review requirements prescribed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important recreational facility for residents in the area. The proposed project would have a beneficial impact to park and recreation resources since it would provide accessibility improvements that would broaden equitable public access to the beach park facilities. The proposed project includes the reconstruction of existing facilities in addition to accessibility improvements. The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important public beach park for residents of the area. As evaluated in the EA, adverse environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed action would be minimized through project design and mitigation measures contained in the document. Adverse effects to water quality and the coastal ecosystem would be minimized by site -specific BMPs. The proposed project would not significantly change the scenic and visual character of the surrounding area. The entire shoreline is subject to inundation due to high seas and swells caused by hurricanes and distant storms and tsunami activity. The proposed improvements would be Page 3 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 designed and constructed in conformance with the standards and requirements of the Hawaii County Code, Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, as applicable. In addition, the project includes BMPs to be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion and potential impacts to water quality. An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was completed for the project site. The AIS identified three historic single feature sites. The mapping, written description, and photography of these sites adequately document them and no further work or preservation is required, per SHPD's consultation and review (see Section H below). Early consultation with agencies, organizations, and individuals was conducted during preparation of the Draft EA for the proposed project. Additional public review occurred during the public comment period for the EA and prior to the publication of the Final EA. Additional comments may be heard during the public hearing before the County of Hawaii Planning Commission during the SMA permit process. F. The Miloli`i Beach Park site is zoned Open District. The purpose of the Open District is to buffer and preserve open land types of use, such as a beach park, which may be characterized by scenic beauty. Public parks are a permitted use in the Open District (Hawai`i County Code, Section 25-5-161(a)(11)). No feature of the proposed accessibility improvements project would conflict with existing zoning. Surrounding land uses include Hau`oli Kamana`o Congregational Church to the east, a residence to the south, and the Pacific Ocean to the west and north. G. The The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps the project site as predominantly Zone X4 with a very small portion within floodway areas designated as Zones AE and VE. Flood Zone AE as defined for the project area applies to lands within the 100-year flood zone with a Base Flood Elevation of 7 feet (FEMA 2017). The Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) report has been uploaded via EPIC. H. An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was completed for the project site. The State Historic Preservation Department (SHPD) completed Chapter 6E-8 Historic Preservation Review for the project and transmitted their determination dated July 8, 2022 to the Department of Parks and Recreation. The SHPD determined that the AIS report prepared for the project satisfied the requirements of HAR Section 13-276-5, and accepted the conclusions found therein (See Appendix B in the Final Environmental Assessment for the SHPD letter and copy of the AIS). I. While there is low probability of encountering archaeological sites in this area, in the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, are identified during the construction activities, all work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find would be protected from additional disturbance, and the State Historic Preservation Division would be notified pursuant to Section 13-280-3, HAR. In the event that iwi kupuna and/or cultural finds are encountered during construction, cultural and lineal Page 4 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4040* Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility NP SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 descendants of the area should be consulted to develop a reinterment plan and cultural preservation plan for proper cultural protocol, curation, and long-term maintenance. As a part of the environmental assessment for this project, the State of Hawai`i's environmental review process requires consideration of the proposed project's potential effects on cultural practices and cultural features in order to "promote responsible decision making" (Section 343, HRS). These cultural practices and features may include traditional cultural properties, which are designated significant historic properties that "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" (Sections 13- 275-6 and 13-284-6, HAR). The intent of the assessment is to "analyze the impact of a proposed action on cultural practices and features associated with the project area" (Office of Environmental Quality Control 1997). The County aims to provide ongoing beach park access during construction of the proposed improvements. If access to the boat turn around is limited any time during construction, the village community would be notified in advance. Because the proposed project represents a continuation of existing uses and would not negatively impact access to the shoreline, or affect designated significant historic properties, it is reasonable to conclude that, pursuant to Act 50, the exercise of Native Hawaiian rights, or any ethnic group, related to gathering, access, or other customary activities within the project area would not be affected, and there would be no direct adverse effect upon cultural practices or beliefs. J. Vegetation at the beach park project area includes Ironwood trees, milo trees, coconut palms, noni plants, and night -blooming cereus. There are several Ironwood trees and ornamental plants surrounded by rock rings throughout the site. This area provides habitat for common animals, including, but not limited to, birds, mongoose, feral cats and dogs, and mice and rats. Due to the previously disturbed nature of the project site, the project site has limited potential for sensitive biological resources to occur. While the project site is highly modified and developed with park facilities, construction activities would result in short-term disturbances to wildlife in the project vicinity. Potential impacts to protected species that may occur in the project area as identified by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) include ten listed species that could occur in the immediate vicinity of the project area: the federally endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the threatened Hawaiian goose, endangered Hawaiian stilt, endangered Hawaiian coot, endangered Hawaiian duck, the threatened Green sea turtle, endangered Hawksbill sea turtle, endangered Hawaiian yellow -faced bees, endangered Procaris hawaiana, endangered Vetericaris chaceorum, endangered Pacific damselfly, and the endangered Orange -black. Additionally, the endangered Hawaiian petrel, band-rumped storm -petrel, and the threatened Newell's shearwater may transit the project area flying to upland breeding colonies. Page 5 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project SSV Application April 6, 2023 Temporary effects during construction would include increased traffic, noise, and overall activity, which could result in short-term disturbances to plants and wildlife in the project vicinity. During construction, site -specific BMPs developed as part of the permitting process and avoidance measures included in this section would minimize erosion and sedimentation and potential adverse effects to wildlife in the vicinity of the project site. No adverse long-term effects to biological resources would occur with implementation of minimization measures above. K. Access to the the existing Miloli`i Beach Park is currently accessible to the public however, the current state of the parking lot, walkways, and basketball/volleyball courts have impacted park access and safety. On a daily basis the park is used for sightseeing, picnicking, sports, community gatherings, community library and education center, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. A charter school uses the pavilion frequently and has an ongoing research project at the park in the marine waters. The coastal portion of the park includes a rocky beach and a large tidal pool. The area near the beachfront is used as a campsite, and campers typically park their vehicle on the dirt beyond the parking area closer toward the beach. Based on camping permits for the site, a maximum of 22 campers per night are permitted. The County aims to provide ongoing beach park access during construction of the proposed improvements. If access to the boat turn around is limited any time during construction, the village community would be notified in advance. L. A copy of the construction drawings showing the existing site have been uploaded to EPIC for reference. M. Construction of the proposed project could result in short-term increases in traffic. During construction of the proposed park accessibility improvements, there would be work vehicles using Miloli`i Road. There is limited traffic on Miloli`i Road, consisting of local traffic or beach visitor traffic. However, the County aims to provide ongoing beach parking and access during construction of the proposed improvements. Temporary parking during construction would likely be onsite or along Miloli`i Road. During construction, the construction contractor would be required to provide for boat turn- around and ensure access to the residential property in the back of the park. The proposed project includes a parking area with 12 standard parking spaces and four handicapped spaces (including 1 van space), in addition to a paved area for boat turnaround. The project also includes installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. These barriers would not prevent access to the existing residence. Page 6 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 There would be no direct increase in operational traffic due to implementation of the proposed project, and no long-term adverse effects to circulation and parking would occur. N. The Miloli`i Beach Park is not served by any utility services. Electricity is provided by solar panels with battery storage on the existing pavilion. Water for the comfort station is provided by privately operated water supply trucks. This water is non -potable and is only used to flush toilets and hand sinks. The project site is served by an on -site septic system. Because no new residences would be constructed on site, and no new employees would be drawn from the local labor pool, no increase in population would result from the proposed project. Therefore, no increases in the demands for public services such as schools, libraries, parks, health services, police, or fire protection would be expected, and no additional public facilities would need to be constructed. Further, activities at the proposed beach park accessibility improvements project site would not affect the provision of utilities and public services to adjacent land uses. Replacement of existing facilities and accessibility improvements planned are expected to have no negative long- term impact on utilities and public services. Item 94: A written narrative providing a detailed justification of the proposed project, which addresses the criteria and conditions set forth in Planning Commission Rule 8-11. Rule 8, Shoreline Setback, provides for the variance process in section 8-4 and defines the criteria for approving a variance in section 8-11. Section 8-11 (b) states: (1) Shoreline -dependent Facility Standard. A variance may be granted for an activity or structure that is necessary for or ancillary to a shoreline -dependent facility or improvement, including drainage facilities and boating, maritime or ocean sports recreational facilities; provided that the proposal is the practicable alternative which best conforms to the purpose of this rule. (2) Public Interest Standard. A variance may be granted for an activity or structure which is undertaken by a public agency or by a public utility regulated under Chapter 269, Hawai `i Revised Statutes, or a private facility or improvement which is undertaken by a private entity and is clearly in the public interest; provided that the proposal is the practicable alternative which best conforms to the purpose of this rule. The Miloli`i Beach Park and pavilion is an important recreational facility for residents in the area. The County of Hawai'i Parks & Recreation's proposed project would have a beneficial impact to park and recreation resources since it would provide accessibility improvements that would broaden equitable public access to the beach park facilities. The proposed accessibility improvements to meet ADA requirements and relocation of the existing pavilion further outside of the shoreline setback will better improve and support the community's use of the beach park amenities. Page 7 of 8 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.�� Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility SSV Application Improvement Project April 6, 2023 In addition, Section 8-11 (c) states: No variance shall be granted unless appropriate conditions are imposed as applicable: (1) To comply with Chapters 10 and 27 of the Hawai `i County Code relating to Erosion and Sedimentation Control and Flood Control, respectively; (2) To maintain safe lateral access along the shoreline or adequately substitute for its loss; (3) To minimize risk of adverse impacts on beach processes; (4) To minimize risk of structures failing and becoming loose rocks or rubble on public property; and (5) To minimize adverse impacts on public views to, from, and along the shoreline. The County of Hawai'i Parks & Recreation will comply with all provisions of Chapters 10 and 27. The proposed improvements will not negatively impact the lateral access along the shoreline, but would increase access due to the relocation of the pavilion and installment of ADA sidewalks. Although portions of the pavilion will remain in the shoreline setback, the footprint of the pavilion will be consistent with the existing structure. This should adequately minimize the risk of adverse impacts to beach processes; the pavilion is currently used by beach park users as well as community groups, and its use is expected to continue after the improvements project. Item #5: A scale -drawn plot plan of the property is uploaded to the EPIC site. Item #6: A shoreline survey of the subject property is uploaded to the EPIC site. Item 97: A list of names, addresses and tax map keys of all owners and lessees of record of surrounding properties who are required to receive notice is uploaded to the EPIC site. Item 98: Most of the required documents have been included in the FEA-FONSI or uploaded independently into the EPIC site. The FEA/FONSI prepared according to Chapter 343, HRS, is also in the EPIC site for reference. Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions or need any other documents to support your review and approval. William F. Bow, M.S. Environmental Director Direct: 808-369-8217 wbow@bowengineering.com Korey L. Johnson, M.S. Environmental Project Manager Direct: 808-369-8214 kjohnson@bowengineering.com Page 8 of 8 Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Miloli`i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii Final Environmental Assessment This environmental document has been prepared pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 343 and Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11, Chapter 200.1 Prepared for: County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Prepared by: Bow Engineering ��A&Development, Inc. Civil Engineering Planning 1953 South Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Telephone: (808) 941-8853 Fax: (808) 945-9299 www.bowengineering.com and Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. December 2022 Planning Dept. Exhibit 3 This page intentionally left blank. PROJECT SUMMARY Project Name: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Miloli`i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii Type of Document: Final Environmental Assessment Proposing/Approving County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Agency: 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Contact: Jeff Ochi, Project Manager (808) 961-8411 Location: Miloli`i Beach Park 89-1151 Miloll'i Road Captain Cook, HI 96704 TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 Proposed Project: The proposed project includes the improvement of existing Miloli`i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act guidelines. HRS Ch. 343 Trigger: Use of state lands and state funds; use of conservation district lands State Land Use Designation: Conservation District Existing Zoning: Open District Special Management Area: Within County of Hawaii SMA Permits Anticipated: Special Management Area Use Permit Shoreline Setback Variance Building Permit Determination: Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) SUMMARY OF MITIGATION MEASURES AND PROJECT COMMITMENTS TO MINIMIZE POTENTIAL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT The following measures have been incorporated into the project description: Site -Specific Best Management Practices Due to the proximity of nearshore ocean waters, the project could present increased potential for water quality impacts during construction. The proposed project would include site -specific Best Management Practices (BMP) to be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion and potential impacts to water quality. The BMPs would include but would not be limited to the USFWS recommended standard BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments: I. Turbidity and siltation from project -related work should be minimized and contained within the project area by silt containment devices and curtailing work during flooding or adverse tidal and weather conditions. BMPs should be maintained for the life of the construction period until turbidity and siltation within the project area is stabilized. All project construction -related debris and sediment containment devices should be removed and disposed of at an approved site. 2. All project construction -related materials and equipment (dredges, vessels, backhoes, silt curtains, etc.) to be placed in an aquatic environment should be inspected for pollutants including, but not limited to; marine fouling organisms, grease, oil, etc., and cleaned to remove pollutants prior to use. Project related activities should not result in any debris disposal, non-native species introductions, or attraction of non- native pests to the affected or adjacent aquatic or terrestrial habitats. Implementing both a litter -control plan and a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plan (HACCP - see http://www.haccp- nnn.org/Wizard/default.asp) can help to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. 3. Project construction -related materials (fill, revetment rock, pipe, etc.) should not be stockpiled in, or in close proximity to aquatic habitats and should be protected from erosion (e.g., with filter fabric, etc.), to prevent materials from being carried into waters by wind, rain, or high surf. 4. Fueling of project -related vehicles and equipment should take place away from the aquatic environment and a contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project should be developed. The plan should be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms should be stored on -site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. 5. All deliberately exposed soil or under -layer materials used in the project near water should be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non-invasive vegetation matting, hydro -seeding, etc. These BMPs will be refined in accordance with County of Hawaii regulatory requirements as part of the permitting process. MITIGATION MEASURES AND REGULATORY REQUIREMENTS Geology, Topography, and Soils All earthwork and grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. The proposed action includes a site -specific BMP plan developed as part of the project to minimize erosion and sedimentation during construction. The BMPs would include site -specific measures as outlined in Section 2.2 of this EA. Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed action includes site -specific BMPs to be implemented during construction in order to prevent any stormwater, sediment, soil, and debris resulting from the proposed construction from adversely impacting the coastal ecosystem or adjacent properties. Further, all earthwork grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Biological Resources During construction, site -specific BMPs developed as part of the permitting process would minimize erosion and sedimentation and potential adverse effects to aquatic biota in the vicinity of the project site. To avoid and minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the USFWS provides the following recommendations: • Do not disturb, remove, or trim woody plants greater than 15 feet tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). • Do not use barbed wire for fencing. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian geese, the USFWS provides the following recommendations: • Do not approach, feed, or disturb Hawaiian geese. • If Hawaiian geese are observed loafing or foraging within the project area during the breeding season (September through April), have a biologist familiar with the nesting behavior of nene survey for nests in and around the project area prior to the resumption of any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). 0 Cease all work immediately and contact the USFWS for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed work, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within said radius after work begins. • In areas where Hawaiian geese are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered secies on -site. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to sea turtles and their nests, the USFWS provides the following applicable recommendations: • Implement site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description and as recommended by the USFWS. • Have a biologist familiar with sea turtles conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present. 0 If a basking sea turtle is found within the project area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. • Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season (May to December). • Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project -related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. 0 If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian waterbirds, the USFWS provides the following recommendations, as applicable: • In areas where waterbirds are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on -site. • Implement site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description and as recommended by the USFWS • Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site prior to project initiation. Repeat surveys again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). If a nest or active brood is found: 0 Contact the Service within 48 hours for further guidance. 0 Establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged. Do not conduct potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer. 0 Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. Project design would reduce nighttime glare effects with low level footpath lighting and timered lights. All lighting would be properly shaded to eliminate light trespass. Therefore, adverse effects to seabirds due to nighttime lighting would be minimized with project features. To avoid and minimize project impacts to yellow -faced bees and their nests, the USFWS provides the following recommendations, as applicable: • If an action will occur in or adjacent to known occupied habitat, a buffer area around the habitat may be required and can be worked out on a site -specific basis through consultation with the Service. • For coastal species, protect all coastal strand habitat from human disturbance, including: 0 No fires or wood collecting 0 Leave woody debris in place 0 Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails 0 Post educational signs to inform people of the presence of sensitive species. The USFWS recommended, site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description would minimize the degradation of water quality and impacts to fish and wildlife resources. The USFWS provides the following additional recommendations, as applicable: • Protect anchialine pools (both in and around) from the following human disturbance: 0 Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails 0 Prevent trash, and other waste from entering into anchialine pools 0 Avoid or limit to the maximum extent practicable entrance into the anchialine pools • Install educational signs near anchialine pools to inform people of the presence of sensitive species and habitats. Historical, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources While there is low probability of encountering archaeological sites in this area, in the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, are identified during the construction activities, all work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find would be protected from additional disturbance, and the State Historic Preservation Division would be notified pursuant to Section 13-280-3, HAR In the event that ini kupuna and/or cultural finds are encountered during construction, cultural and lineal descendants of the area should be consulted to develop a reinterment plan and cultural preservation plan for proper cultural protocol, curation, and long-term maintenance. The County aims to provide ongoing beach park access during construction of the proposed improvements. If access to the boat turn -around is limited any time during construction, the village community would be notified in advance. Air Quality and Climate All construction work will be in conformance with the air pollution control standards contained in HAR Title 11 Chapter 59 "Ambient Air Quality Standards," and Chapter 60 "Air Pollution Control," which would minimize air quality emissions. Noise Construction will be confined to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday. No construction activities exceeding maximum allowable noise levels will occur on Sundays and holidays without prior notice. Construction activities will comply with HAR Chapter 11-46, "Community Noise Control." Implementation of these measures and compliance with regulatory requirements would minimize environmental impacts resulting from the proposed project. Permits and approvals required for implementation of the proposed project are listed in Section 2.3 of this EA. TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................... 1 1.1 Project Overview and Project Need............................................................................................1 1.2 Purpose of the Environmental Assessment...............................................................................1 1.3 Federal and State Authority..........................................................................................................2 1.4 Steps in the Environmental Review Process..............................................................................2 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION........................................................................................................4 2.1 Environmental Setting...................................................................................................................4 2.2 Description of the Proposed Action...........................................................................................9 2.3 Permits and Approvals Required or Potentially Required .................................................... 11 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ANTICIPATED EFFECTS, AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES................................................................................... 12 3.1 Geology, Topography, and Soils............................................................................................... 12 3.2 Hydrology and Water Quality.................................................................................................... 13 3.3 Natural Hazards........................................................................................................................... 17 3.4 Biological Resources................................................................................................................... 22 3.5 Historic, Archaeological, and Cultural Resources.................................................................. 25 3.6 Air Quality and Climate.............................................................................................................. 29 3.7 Noise..............................................................................................................................................30 3.8 Visual Resources.......................................................................................................................... 30 3.9 Social and Economic Characteristics........................................................................................ 31 3.10 Utilities and Public Services....................................................................................................... 32 3.11 Traffic and Parking...................................................................................................................... 32 3.12 Conformance with State and Local Plans, Policies, and Land Use Controls ..................... 33 4 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION....................................................................... 47 4.1 Proposed Alternatives................................................................................................................. 47 5 FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION....................................................................................... 49 6 INDIVIDUALS, COMMUNITY GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONSULTED ................................... 53 6.1 Early Consultation....................................................................................................................... 53 6.2 Miloli`i Community Meetings.................................................................................................... 54 6.3 Comments and Responses on the Draft Environmental Assessment ................................ 55 6.4 Environmental Assessment Preparation.................................................................................. 56 7 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................... 57 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmement i Draft Environmental Assessment FIGURES Figure 1 Vicinity and Location Map............................................................................................................5 Figure 2 Project Area Tax Map Key............................................................................................................6 Figure3 Conceptual Site Plan......................................................................................................................7 Figure 4 National Wetlands Inventory Map........................................................................................... 15 Figure5 Flood Hazard Map...................................................................................................................... 21 Figure 6 State Land Use District Map...................................................................................................... 35 Figure 7 Special Management Area Map................................................................................................. 39 Figure 8 Shoreline Setback Area............................................................................................................... 40 Figure 9 Alternative 2 Conceptual Site Plan........................................................................................... 48 APPENDICES Appendix A Consultation and Comment Letters Early Consultation Comment Letters Draft EA Comment Letters Table: Summary Comments and Responses Appendix B Archaeological Survey Appendix C Shoreline Certification Maps Appendix D IWS Assessment and Feasibility Study for Miloli`i Beach Park ii Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 1 INTRODUCTION This Final Environmental Assessment (EA) has been processed as a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) by the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation. As a result, the preparation of an Environmental Impact Statement is not required. Various places in the EA have been modified to reflect input received in the comments made on the Draft EA or during the public scoping meetings. To facilitate the readers' ability to distinguish revisions made to the Draft EA, additional or modified non -procedural text is shaded, as in this paragraph. 1.1 PROJECT OVERVIEW AND PROJECT NEED The County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to improve Miloli`i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines, which would improve recreational access for disabled visitors to the beach park. The project involves improvements to the comfort station and associated water supply, pavilion, parking lot, walkways, and basketball/volleyball courts. The existing Miloli`i Beach Park parking lot, walkways, and basketball/volleyball courts are in a current state of disrepair, with cracks and eroded areas. These conditions have impacted park access and safety. Both the restroom and halau/pavilion structures must be replaced in their entirety due to their age and extensive need for repair and modifications, and because the pavilion is located in the flood zone. Further, the existing pavilion is currently unpermitted, and would be brought up to County standards with implementation of the proposed improvements. The County Department of Parks and Recreation has identified the following objectives of the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project (Miloli`i Beach Park Project): • To protect the health and safety of the public. • To bring the existing park facilities into compliance with ADA guidelines and County permit requirements. • To provide connecting walks and ramps to park facilities for greater accessibility from feature to feature. • To maintain fishing access for local community. • To maintain the character of the existing Miloli`i Beach Park. • To provide improved recreational facilities for the Miloli`i community. • To improve the longevity of existing beach park facilities. The Department of Parks and Recreation intends to retain the park amenities and features that currently exist while minimizing the amount of change to the park as much as possible. The proposed accessibility improvements are necessary to comply with the federal court order to complete ADA improvements, and not to increase visitation from outside the community. 1.2 PURPOSE OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT The evaluation of projects to determine their effects on the environment is required by the Hawaii Revised Statutes "RS), Chapter 343. An Environmental Assessment (EA) is a "written evaluation to determine whether an action may have a significant effect" (HRS, Section 343-2). The agency Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmement Draft Environmental Assessment with primary responsibility over the project (the proposing agency) is required to prepare an EA and make a final environmental determination according to the presence of significant impacts or the lack thereof. As stated in HRS, Section 343-1: An environmental review process will integrate the review of environmental concerns with existing planning processes of the State and counties, and alert decision makers to significant environmental effects which may result from the implementation of certain actions. ...The process of reviewing environmental effects is desirable because environmental consciousness is enhanced, cooperation and coordination are encouraged, and public participation during the review process benefits all parties involved and society as a whole. As described above, the basic purpose of an EA is to provide information to the public and decision makers on proposed actions. The EA must also disclose: potential significant adverse environmental impacts, the expected primary and secondary consequences, and the cumulative as well as the short - and long-term effects of the action. 1.3 FEDERAL AND STATE AUTHORITY The proposed action would use state funding and would be subject to state environmental laws and regulations. Environmental review procedures required by the State of Hawaii include compliance with HRS, Chapter 343 "Environmental Impact Statements", and Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Tide 11, Chapter 200.1, Department of Health, "Environmental Impact Statement Rules". The project site is located within the State's land use district of "Conservation District," which is under the jurisdiction of the State Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR). Permitted uses, including recreational uses, are defined under HAR Tide 13, Chapter 5, and require compliance with the State's environmental review process. The project area is also located within the County's Special Management Area (SMA), as regulated under HRS, Chapter 2015A, Part II. Compliance with the State's environmental review process is required. No federal funding is anticipated for Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement project, and would not be subject to the environmental review requirements prescribed under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). 1.4 STEPS IN THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS Early Consultation and Data Gathering HAR, Section 11-200.1-18 requires that an agency must consult with agencies and individuals that might have jurisdiction or expertise with respect to the proposed action. Early consultation is considered an important part of the environmental review process — the ultimate goal is the gathering of information, data, and public concerns. A preliminary description of the project was circulated to agencies and individuals in July 2019, and phone consultations were conducted with permitting agencies as necessary. For a detailed description of the early consultation component of this project, see Chapter 6, Individuals, Community Groups, andAgenczes Consulted, of this EA. Copies of the written comments are included in Appendix A. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Community Involvement Several public meetings were held at the park to provide opportunity for community feedback and input, including meetings on October 18, 2019, November 3, 2019, and May 16, 2021. Community concerns identified at the meetings are summarized in Section 6.2 of this EA. Based on community input, some design changes were made to the comfort station as set forth in Section 2.2 of this EA. All comments and responses to these comments are summarized in Section 6.3 of this EA. No changes to the analysis contained in Chapter 3 of this EA would result from the design modifications. Circulation of the Draft Environmental Assessment Following completion of the Draft EA, the environmental document was submitted to the State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC)1. Notification of the availability of the Draft EA was published in the August 8, 2020 bimonthly bulletin called The Environmental Notice, in addition to the Hawaii Tribune Herald and made available at the public library. Due to concerns regarding adequate opportunities for public participation during COVID-19, the comment period for the project was extended, and notice of availability of the Draft EA was published in the subsequent issues of The Environmental Notice, including the September 8, 2020 issue, and the October 8, 2020 issue. During the 90-day public comment period ending November 9, 2020, agencies, organizations, and individuals were provided the opportunity to comment on the proposed project. For the proposed project, Department of Parks and Recreation submitted a notice of determination with the Draft EA to the OEQC with an Anticipated Finding of No Significant Impact (AFONSI) (HAR, Section 11-200.1-11). Section 6.3 of this EA contains a summary of comments on the Draft EA. Copies of all written comments received on the Draft EA are contained in Appendix A of this document. Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact After the review period for the Draft EA, the Department of Parks and Recreation considered all comments and incorporated necessary changes into a Final EA. The purposes of the Final EA are to document agency and public consultation on the project and respond to the comments received during the comment period on the Draft EA. The Final EA also considers new issues and changes to the project since publication of the Draft EA, establishes that there are no significant impacts, and that a FONSI is appropriate so that the project can proceed. The publication of the notice of availability of the Final EA-FONSI in The Environmental Notice initiates a 30-day judicial challenge period under HRS, Section 343-7(b). If the proposing agency reviews public comments on the Draft EA, and the public comments indicate that the proposed action could in fact have significant effects, the agency would prepare a Final EA supporting an Environmental Impact Statement Preparation Notice (EISPN) determination. i On July 1, 2021, the OEQC was transferred and renamed to the Environmental Review Program, within the Office of Planning and Sustainable Development. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 2 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 2.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Location Miloli`i Beach Park is located at the coastal village of Miloli`i in the South Kona District in the southwestern region of Hawaii Island (see Figure 1). Miloli`i is considered one of the most traditional fishing villages in Hawaii. The existing park site includes approximately 1.41 acres identified as Tax Map Key (TMK): (3) 8-9-004:001 (see Figure 2). Exhibit 2.1 — View of the existing pavilion and edge of parking area from the basketball court. Existing Site Conditions Existing facilities at the Miloli`i Beach Park include a pavilion, restrooms serviced by an existing Individual Wastewater System (IWS) comprised of a septic tank and leach field, a basketball court, paved parking, a non -potable water system including a water tank, shed, picnic area, and designated camping area (see Figure 3 for existing and proposed facilities). According to the Department of Parks and Recreation, the existing Miloli`i Beach Park pavilion was built (unpermitted) before 2006. The park pavilion, sometimes referred to as the Miloli`i Halau, is an open-air building, approximately 80 feet by 40 feet, with multiple picnic benches under the covered building. There is existing lighting in the pavilion. On a daily basis the park is used for sightseeing, picnicking, sports, community gatherings, community library and education center, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. A charter school uses the pavilion frequently and has an ongoing research project at the park in the marine waters. The coastal portion of the park includes a rocky beach and a large tidal pool. The area near the beachfront is used as a campsite, and campers typically park their vehicle on the dirt beyond the parking area closer toward the beach. Based on camping permits for the site, a maximum of 22 campers per night are permitted. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Raae,e ,,k.. KAUA'I as wa�maa ,m�� �� as as tN p �a o I.—K..9 PePee�e Fa�ea w�A& Kala9 ae erv�, o Island of rofenpaPSe� a Hawai'i 1."1. pa�oa o N�e��Na,�eaeo Ka�apala ,� ,o���o Ka��a�epa �rea,Naa. � Fo�,Keee�e "Re=d� aapa a ATpa�aetfoe oral urea Keb Forest Oaa O Reserve Manuk3 Slate weysitle Oceen View � NaelMu Project Area Project Area SOURCE: Planning Partners, 2019; Google Maps, Google Earth, 2019 O'AH U tN MOLOKA'I �,% MAUI LANA'P 1�5 STATE OF HAWAI'I HAWAH 66', il — Miloh ai Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Figure 1 Vicinity and Location Map of „< Project Area INSET "C" i ti'vo�uIOA L I M- INSET "B" M / L o t / PLAT O! MTL OLT/ 6 rt0.AZ �J Project Area Q Q o 0 a ^.,, w,..i� ;'{Z; `�•'- y� a 's' "�Ttin.RY..•�T�...,• Project Area (See Inset "C") Miloh'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: Planning Partners, 2019; Hnan & Associates, 2019 Figure 2 Project Area Tax Map Key I 1 II I 1 EXIST IWS LEACH FIELD TO REMAIN EXIST COMFORT STATION TO BE DEMOLISHED POND 111 1 1 ,1 1 1 EXIST COURTS TO BE RESURFACED '1 n L I I- i 1 ((( �- EXIST POTABLE WATER SYSTEM TO �BE + LACED NEW COMFORT STATION & POTABLE WATER SYSTEM — EXIST PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED — -- � I dduil9 I '; I I I 1 11 I � v it 5— WIDE ACCESSIBLE CONCRETE WALKWAY 1 0 , 0 I EXIST COMMUNITY PAVILION TO BE DEMOLISHED I NEW 1{COMMUNITY PAVILION ° ' a� BOAT TURNAROUND AREA , BOAT Aj� LIMITS OF NEW AC PAVEMENT �^ , 40 20 r Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 2022 Figure 3 Conceptual Site Plan Draft Environmental Assessment Exhibit 2.2 — View of the campground area. 1 Exhibit 2.3 — View of the basketball court and comfort station in the background. Surrounding land uses include Hau`oli Kamana`o Congregational Church to the east, a residence to the south, and the Pacific Ocean to the west and north. 8 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment 2.2 DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSED ACTION The Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to improve Miloli`i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. The proposed project includes: • replacement of the existing pavilion (with storage and electrical room) with proper permits to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards; • replacement of the non -potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; • improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible; • improvement of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible; • reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence; • construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence; • designation of a boat turnaround area; and, • installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. The proposed action includes demolishing both the existing pavilion and comfort station (see Figure 3 for the conceptual site plan). The pavilion use would remain under community control. Parking would include 16 total stalls, including 12 standard stalls and 4 ADA accessible stalls (including 1 van accessible stall). A boat turnaround area adjacent to the pavilion would be paved with "No Parking" signage. The existing solar panels (PV system) on the pavilion would be removed and salvaged and replaced with a new PV/battery power system (see Modifications to the Site Plan, below). The proposed project includes lighting for the restrooms and area lighting along the accessible paths. Security lighting for the pavilion would run off of the PV system. Solar tubes for natural lighting may be considered in the comfort station. A maximum of 22 campers per night are currently allowed with permits. With implementation of the improvements, camping rules and reservations would remain the same as those existing. Two trees would be removed with construction of the proposed improvements. Excavated materials from construction would be separated and reused on the project site, as possible. Following completion of the proposed improvements, all unpaved areas to be graded would be grassed or hydroseeded. Any remaining construction waste would be removed from the project site. New signage would include accessible parking signs in the parking area and accessible signs for the restrooms. The County aims to provide ongoing beach parking and access during construction of the proposed improvements. Temporary parking during construction would likely be onsite or along Miloli`i Road. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Modifications to the Site Plan Since issuance of the Draft EA in July 2020, some design changes have been made based on community feedback during the scoping meetings. Changes to the design include the following: • Comfort Station: the comfort station layout has been updated to allow for single occupancy restrooms, janitor room, and secured potable water tank and pump system. • A new battery powered system (via PV panels on pavilion roof) to provide electrical power for site lighting (accessible paths, parking lot, playground, comfort station, pavilion), power to water tank and pump system and portable generator use at pavilion (to be provided and used by community). • Three (3) wall mounted junction boxes for future installation and use of security camera system. Cameras would also be used to check on surf conditions (by civil defense). • Drywells would be installed in the parking lot to connect and capture roof runoff from pavilion downspouts (drywells are still being sited and are not shown on site plans). Site -Specific Best Management Practices Due to the proximity of nearshore ocean waters, the project could present increased potential for water quality impacts during construction. The proposed project would include site -specific Best Management Practices (BMP) to be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion and potential impacts to water quality. The BMPs would include but would not be limited to the USFWS recommended standard BMPs2 regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments: Turbidity and siltation from project -related work should be minimized and contained within the project area by silt containment devices and curtailing work during flooding or adverse tidal and weather conditions. BMPs should be maintained for the life of the construction period until turbidity and siltation within the project area is stabilized. All project construction -related debris and sediment containment devices should be removed and disposed of at an approved site. 2. All project construction -related materials and equipment (dredges, vessels, backhoes, silt curtains, etc.) to be placed in an aquatic environment should be inspected for pollutants including, but not limited to; marine fouling organisms, grease, oil, etc., and cleaned to remove pollutants prior to use. Project related activities should not result in any debris disposal, non-native species introductions, or attraction of non- native pests to the affected or adjacent aquatic or terrestrial habitats. Implementing both a litter -control plan and a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plan (HACCP - see http://www.haccp- nnn.org/Wizard/default.asp) can help to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. 3. Project construction -related materials (fill, revetment rock, pipe, etc.) should not be stockpiled in, or in close proximity to aquatic habitats and should be protected from erosion (e.g., with filter fabric, etc.), to prevent materials from being carried into waters by wind, rain, or high surf. 2 Since no activities are proposed in the nearby marine environment, several BMPs from the USFWS standard recommendations were not included. 10 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment 4. Fueling of project -related vehicles and equipment should take place away from the aquatic environment and a contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project should be developed. The plan should be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms should be stored on -site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. 5. All deliberately exposed soil or under -layer materials used in the project near water should be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non- invasive vegetation matting, hydro -seeding, etc. These BMPs will be refined in accordance with County of Hawaii regulatory requirements as part of the permitting process. Project Phasing and Construction Cost The project would be constructed based on funding availability in one phase over approximately 6 to 8 months. The estimated construction costs for completion of the proposed beach park improvements is $1.75 million. 2.3 PERMITS AND APPROVALS REQUIRED OR POTENTIALLY REQUIRED Government permits required or potentially required to implement the proposed action are listed below: State and County • Chapter 343, HRS, Preparation and approval of an Environmental Assessment — The County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation is the proposing agency for the proposed action and has the authority to determine if the EA is adequate and whether a FONSI is appropriate • Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) — Site Plan approval is required by DLNR, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) • National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Permit for Construction Stormwater Activities (not required) - since construction activities would disturb approximately 0.44 acres (less than one acre of total land area), an NPDES permit would not be required • Special Management Area Permit (SMA) — County of Hawaii, Department of Planning and Permitting • Shoreline Setback Variance — A portion of the concrete walkway to the campground and additional paving would be located within the Shoreline Setback Area, which may require a Shoreline Setback Variance from the County of Hawaii, Department of Planning and Permitting • Noise Permit — State of Hawaii, Department of Health • Construction Permits — Grading and Grubbing permits from the Department of Public Works Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 11 3 DESCRIPTION OF THE AFFECTED ENVIRONMENT, ANTICIPATED EFFECTS, AND PROPOSED MITIGATION MEASURES The intent of this chapter is to describe the existing physical and social environment that is affected by the proposed action. As defined in HAR, Section 11-200.1, Environmental Impact Statement Rules, potential project impacts or effects may include primary and secondary impacts, in addition to cumulative impacts: A "primary impact" or "direct impact" means impacts or effects that are caused by the action and occur at the same time and place. A "secondary impact" or "indirect impact" means an impact or effect that is caused by the action and occurs later in time, but is still reasonably foreseeable. An indirect effect may include a growth -inducing effect and other effects related to induced changes in the pattern of land use, population density, or growth rate, and related effects on air, water, and other natural systems, including ecosystems. A "cumulative impact" means the impact on the environment that results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time (IIAR, Section 11-200.1-2). Potential impacts that may result from implementation of the proposed action and mitigation measures to minimize the adverse impacts are described below. 3.1 GEOLOGY, TOPOGRAPHY, AND SOILS Miloli`i is located on the flat coastal plain off of the southwest slope of Mauna Loa, a volcano rising 13,679 feet above the Pacific Ocean. Mauna Loa is among the world's most active volcanoes, having erupted 33 times since its first well -documented historical eruption in 1843. Eight of these flows have reached down the slopes of Mauna Loa into North and South Kona, and four have reached the ocean. A 1926 eruption inundated a village named Ho`opuloa, just north of Miloli`i (USGS 2017). The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) classifies the soils in Miloli`i as Punaluu-Lava flows complex, 2 to 10 percent slopes (Map Symbol 121) (NRCS 2018). The land characteristics include organic material over Pahoehoe lava flows, which is common in this area. These soils are well drained (NRCS 2018). The project area is relatively flat, with slopes ranging from 0 to 1.5 percent generally sloped toward the southern portion of the project site. Elevations on the project site range from 6.7-7.7 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL). Based on soil suitability and extent, the State of Hawaii, Department of Agriculture has established the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH) system to identify areas of prime farmland. The ALISH system classifies three types of land suitable for agriculture: Prime Lands, Unique Lands, and Other Lands. The project site is not located on designated agricultural lands of importance (Hawai`i OP 1977). Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 12 Draft Environmental Assessment IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Implementation of the proposed action would result in disturbance of less than 1 acre (approximately 0.44 acres). The proposed earthwork at the site would consist of minor grading. All vegetation within the grading limits would be removed during construction and re -grassed or hydroseeded following project completion. Because the project site is relatively flat and has been previously graded and leveled, implementation of the project is not expected to involve substantial additional grading or earth -moving activities. There would be a short-term increase in dust during demolition and soil erosion during construction since grading associated with construction of the proposed facilities would result in the exposure of bare soil to potential erosion. All earthwork and grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. The proposed action includes a site -specific Best Management Practices (BMP) plan developed as part of the project to minimize erosion and sedimentation during construction. The BMPs would include site -specific measures as outlined in Section 2.2 of this EA. With implementation of these BMPs, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact due to soil erosion or off -site sediment transport. For a discussion of drainage on the project site, see Section 3.2, Hydrology and W�YlaterQuality. While the proposed accessibility improvements could slightly increase the amount of impermeable surfaces, all stormwater would continue to percolate into onsite soils. The construction of the accessibility improvements and replacement of existing park facilities would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the site in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation, or flooding on- or off -site. For a discussion of stormwater erosion and sedimentation, see Section 3.2, Hydrology and VaterQuality. No long-term or cumulative adverse effects to topography or soils are anticipated with implementation of the proposed action. 3.2 HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY Coastal Features The village of Miloli`i is located on the relatively flat Kapalilua coastal plain. There are three bays in the project area, including Ho`opuloa Bay, Miloli`i Bay, and Omoka`a Bay, with little protection from ocean waves and surge. Shoreline features in the community include a black sand beach at Ho`opuloa Bay; the broad, gently sloping lava flows extending into the sea between Ho`opuloa Bay and Miloli`i Bay; and the shallow and exposed lava platform reefs extending from Miloli`i Bay to Omoka`a Bay. (Pa`a Pono Miloll'i 2017) Surface Waters There are no surface waters or streams in the project area. The majority of perennial streams on the island of Hawaii occur in the windward areas of higher rainfall. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 13 Draft Environmental Assessment Groundwater As described in Section 3.1, Geology, Topography and Soils, the surface geology of the project area is characterized by historic lava flows with little soil coverage that is very well drained (MRCS 2018). On Hawaii Island, groundwater recharge occurs when rainfall percolates through the root zone to the basal aquifer (State of Hawaii 2019). Because of the high permeability of the project area soils, precipitation on the project site generally percolates to the underlying groundwater, and direct runoff to the ocean rarely occurs (Farber & Associates 2012). During site investigations by Bow Engineering, Inc., brackish springs were observed in nearshore areas. The project area is within Southwest Mauna Loa Aquifer Sector Area, within the Manuka ground water hydrologic unit (State of Hawaii 2019). The 2019 predicted sustainable yield for the Manuka groundwater unit is approximately 25 million gallons per day (State of Hawaii 2019). Wetlands A review of the USFWS National Wetland Inventory Map was completed to identify the presence of wetlands within the vicinity of the project. While there is Estuarine and Marine Deepwater and Wetland identified for the coastal shore, no potentially jurisdictional wetlands or wetlands of the United States were identified on the project site (see Figure 4) (USFWS 2019). State WaterQualiy Standards Coastal waters in the vicinity of Miloli`i Bay are classified by the State Department of Health (DOH) as "AA" (DOH 2O14). The objective of Class AA waters is that their waters remain in their natural pristine state as nearly as possible. According to HAR Section 11-54-3(c)(1), Class AA waters shall encounter "an absolute minimum of pollution or alteration of water quality from any human -caused source or actions." Water Quality and Marine Environment The Clean Water Act (CWA), Section 303(d), requires states to submit a list of waters that do not attain or maintain applicable water quality numeric criteria, in addition to a priority ranking of impaired waters for Total Maximum Daily Loads (TMDL) development based on the severity of pollution and the uses of the waters. After the identification of water quality -limited waters is completed, states develop TMDLs at a level necessary to achieve the applicable state water quality standards. The State's water quality report lists the Miloli`i Beach marine waters for turbidity during the dry season, and is categorized as a "low" priority for initiating TMDL development for the next cycle of monitoring and assessment (DOH CWB 2018). 14 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Wetlands Inventory, Surface Waters and Wetlands Mapper, 2019 Figure 4 National Wetlands Inventory Map Draft Environmental Assessment Water Quality Testing and the Existing Individual Wastewater System Residents who use the beach park for recreational beach activities have expressed concerns over water quality, particularly high bacteria levels due to illness and infection experienced periodically by beach -users. Water Quality testing was conducted at five different locations at Miloli`i Beach Park at high and low tides between March 9, 2020 and March 11, 2020 (see Appendix D of this EA). Testing was conducted in order to assess the existing individual wastewater system (IWS), and to provide recommendations for wastewater treatment options to reduce potential bacterial output to beach park waters from the existing restroom facilities. In general, the waters surrounding Miloli`i Beach Park are being negatively impacted by enterococcus. The areas of greatest concentrations (Areas B, B-Freshwater, and C) are close in proximity and may be from similar groundwater sources such as upland residences or facilities. Samples near the entrance to the beach park and pavilion (Location B) were found to have the highest enterococcus levels, which exceeded the limit for recreation waters. The shallow marine cove fronting the beach park (Location D) was predicted to have the highest bacteria levels due to its proximity to the existing leach field. However, samples from this location were found to have the lowest enterococcus levels, well below the limits allowed for recreational waters. A dye test originating at the comfort station's septic tank was performed to trace effluent through the system. If the effluent and dye reached the ground water table, it was expected that the dye would be present in marine waters surrounding the beach park. No dye was observed in the adjacent marine waters through the investigation period and beach park users did not report observing any dye in the days following the investigation period. The existing IWS system was completed and approved by DOH in December 2006. The IWS condition assessment completed on March 10, 2020 found that both the inflow and outflow side of the septic tank were full, while effluent levels were observed to be normal. Community residents have indicated that the septic tank is always full prior to pumping every three months. The IWS site investigation and assessment indicate that the existing IWS appears to be adequate during low to normal usage periods. However, the system may be undersized for the estimated weekend use. The feasibility study considered alternate wastewater system options, such as a holding system, evaporative toilet system, or prefabricated waterless restroom; however, these systems were generally considered possible but not recommended for the Miloli`i Beach Park site conditions (see Appendix D for additional information). IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project would have minimal effect on groundwater recharge because improvements would consist of the replacement of existing park facilities. Existing drainage patterns with respect to adjacent properties would be maintained. Proposed drainage improvements would follow existing drainage patterns. The proposed site is currently divided into two drainage basins. One basin conveys the majority of runoff generated from the project site to the ocean. The second basin conveys runoff from the northeastern portion of the site towards Miloli`i Road. Precipitation falling on the site would discharge into the ground or flow to these drainage basins as it does under existing conditions, and off -site runoff would not increase as a result of the proposed project. 16 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Construction activities disturbing one or more acres are regulated under the National Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) stormwater program and are required by the State to obtain a NPDES permit. Because the project would disturb approximately 0.44 acres (less than one acre), a construction NPDES permit would not be required. However, construction activities could result in adverse impacts to water quality, including erosion and increased sedimentation in storm water runoff. The proposed action includes site -specific BMPs to be implemented during construction in order to prevent any stormwater, sediment, soil, and debris resulting from the proposed construction from adversely impacting the coastal ecosystem or adjacent properties. Compliance with BMPs for construction would minimize impacts to water quality. Further, all earthwork grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Based on the Water Quality Investigation it was found that while waters surrounding MBP are being negatively impacted by enterococcus, waters closest to the leach field had the lowest enterococcus measured. There were also no signs of effluent leaching from the dye test performed. Based on these findings, it appears that the existing IWS is sufficient for handling normal day-to-day flows. The proposed accessibility improvements project would not increase park use, and there would be no potentially increased water quality impacts from the IWS as a result of the project. Further investigation and testing during high usage periods is recommended, in addition to increasing the frequency of pumping from once every three months to once a month. This will help determine if the existing IWS is functioning properly during high usage periods and determine an approximate high -usage population. There would be no work within coastal waters with implementation of the proposed accessibility improvements. The replacement pavilion would be approximately 22 feet set back from the existing sea wall, and the end of the new path at the BBQ area is approximately 20 feet from the shoreline. A Shoreline Certification was approved for the project to verify setback distances on October 31, 2019 (see Appendix C). Because no work would occur in the water, a Department of the Army permit from the U.S. Army Corps would not be required. No long-term or cumulative adverse effects to hydrology or water quality are anticipated with implementation of the proposed action. For a discussion of impacts due to soil erosion and off -site sediment transport, see Section 3.1, Geology, Topography and Soils. For a discussion of impacts due to flooding, see Section 3.3, Natural Ha.Zards. 3.3 NATURAL HAZARDS Natural hazards in the project region include earthquakes, volcanic activity, waves and storms, flooding from hurricanes and tropical storms, and tsunamis. Climate change and the related sea level rise will also impact the Hawaiian Islands. According to USGS hazard ratings, the Overall Hazard Assessment (OHA) for the Miloli`i region is moderate (4). Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 17 Draft Environmental Assessment Earthquake and Volcanic Ha.Zards Most of the earthquakes in Hawaii are directly related to volcanic activity and are caused by magma moving beneath the earth's surface. Numerous small earthquakes are reported each year, mostly on Hawaii Island. For the most part, earthquakes on Hawaii are concentrated beneath Kilauea and Mauna Loa, particularly beneath the south flanks of both volcanoes. As stated in Section 3.2, Geology, Topography, and Soils, the project area is located on the flat coastal plain off of the southwest slope of Mauna Loa. According to FEMA earthquake hazard maps, the project area is located within Seismic Design Category D, which means it could experience strong shaking with sustained damage to poorly designed or built structures (FEMA 2019). Strong earthquakes in Hawai`i's past have destroyed buildings, water tanks, and bridges, and have disrupted water, sewer, and utility lines. Miloli`i lies in lava flow hazard Zone 23. The volcanic/seismic hazard is high along the Miloli`i coast due to recent volcanism and significant seismicity associated with eruptions of Kilauea Volcano (USGS undated). Tsunami and Flood Ha.Zards The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) maps the project site as predominantly Zone X4 with a very small portion within floodway areas designated as Zones AE and VE (see Figure 5). Flood Zone AE as defined for the project area applies to lands within the 100-year flood zone with a Base Flood Elevation of 7 feet (FEMA 2017). Flood Zone VE as defined for the project area applies to lands within the coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action) with a Base Flood Elevation of 10 feet (HNFIP 2019). The project site is located within the tsunami inundation zone (HNFIP 2019). High waves are only a moderately low threat where annual wave heights from south swell are generally only 1 to 4 feet. Storms are ranked moderately high hazard because Miloli`i faces west toward approaching Kona Storms and the typical track of passing tropical cyclones. The rocky coast of the project area is relatively effective at withstanding denudation, so erosion is moderately low (USGS undated). Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Global Warming is a public health and environmental concern around the world. As global concentrations of atmospheric greenhouse gases increase, global temperatures increase, weather extremes increase, and air pollution concentrations increase. Global warming and climate change have been observed to contribute to poor air quality, rising sea levels, melting glaciers, stronger storms, more intense and longer droughts, more frequent heat waves, increases in the number of wildfires and their intensity, and other threats to human health (IPCC 2013, 2022). The five warmest years in the 1880-2019 record have all occurred since 2015, while nine of the 10 warmest years have occurred since 2005; the year 2019 was the second warmest year in the 140-year record (NOAA 2020). ' Zone I represents the areas that are most hazardous and Zone 9 the least hazardous. 4 Zone X includes areas of minimal flood hazards, which area areas determined to be outside the 0.2 percent annual chance of flood. 18 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment The influences of climate change on global and local ecosystems are varied and often detrimental. In Hawaii, the rate of warming air temperature has quadrupled in the last 40 years to over 0.3°F (0.17°C) per decade. Higher temperatures are projected to result in native plant and animal stress, an increase in heat -related illnesses and vector -borne diseases such as dengue fever, and a higher concentration of invasive species. Additional impacts are projected to include a decrease in trade winds and overall disruption of rainfall patterns; warmer oceans and higher ocean acidity, which could lead to coral bleaching; and a rise in sea levels. Projected sea -level rise will undoubtedly increase erosion and flooding statewide and expose coastal communities to greater hazards (University of Hawaii 2014). Sea -level rise has had dramatic impacts on the beaches along this coast. Between 1940 and 1980, the shoreline at Honomalino beach, located approximately one mile south of Miloli`i, moved 200-300 feet landward (USGS undated). Sea -level rise hazard is ranked high in the low-lying segments south of Ho`opuloa, including the project area (USGS undated). According to a recent report by the Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission (2017), potential sea level rise could result in low-lying coastal areas around the island to become chronically flooded within the mid- to latter -half of this century. This land will become submerged by coastal erosion, direct marine flooding from tides and waves, or become new wetlands behind the shoreline from rising water tables and reduced drainage. The Hawaii Sea Level Rise Report and Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewers document the modeled potential future exposure of each island to multiple coastal hazards as a result of sea level rise. For the island of Hawaii, the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) is the footprint of passive inundation, one of three flooding hazards with sea level rise, including passive inundation (flooding), coastal erosion, and annual high wave runup (Romine, et. al. 2020). These hazards were modeled for four future sea level rise scenarios, including 0.5 feet, 1.1 feet, 2.0 feet, and 3.2 feet. The 3.2-foot projection of sea level rise is considered an "intermediate" scenario by 2100 and an "extreme" scenario as soon as 2060 (Romine, et. al. 2020). Based on modeling predictions, areas of Miloli`i Beach Park would be vulnerable to chronic flooding with 3.2 feet of sea level rise. There is an existing seawall along most of the shoreline of the project site. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Natural Ha.Zards Construction of the proposed park accessibility improvement project would not result in increased flooding or hazards from flooding in surrounding areas. The proposed pavilion location would be shifted south of the existing location and away from the shoreline. The new pavilion would be relocated outside of Flood Zone VE, a coastal flood zone (see Figure 5). 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. Local community flood ordinances may stipulate higher standards that can be more restrictive and would take precedence over the minimum NFIP standards. The proposed 5 All sea level rise results from the hazard modeling and vulnerability assessment can be viewed on the Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer (http://hawaiisealevelriseviewer.org/). Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 19 Draft Environmental Assessment improvements would be designed and constructed in conformance with the standards and requirements of the Hawaii County Code, Chapter 27, Floodplain Management. In accordance with Section 27-23(l), all new construction in a coastal high hazard area must be constructed with materials and utility equipment resistant to flood damage and using methods and practices that minimize flood damage. All development permits would be reviewed for consistency with the requirements of the Hawaii County Code prior to approval. The proposed facilities would be designed in accordance with County requirements and good engineering practice, which would minimize damage during tropical storm, hurricane, or strong wind events, and earthquake events. No significant environmental effects would result, and no mitigation would be necessary. No significant long-term or cumulative adverse environmental effects would result from natural hazards, and no mitigation would be necessary. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise Greenhouse gas emissions would be generated from the proposed accessibility improvement project during construction and operation. Temporary greenhouse gas emissions would occur during construction activities, predominantly from vehicle and equipment exhaust. No increase in operational greenhouse gas emissions are anticipated — limited emissions would continue from maintenance/work vehicles accessing the site and from beach park visitor vehicle trips. Greenhouse gas emissions would not be expected to be significant, and the project would not be expected to make a substantial contribution to the cumulatively significant impact of global warming and climate change. The project site is located along the shoreline. According to data from the Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer, a portion of the project site could be vulnerable to sea level rise exposure in the long-term, including a portion of the proposed pavilion and some of the camping area. While the sea level rise exposure modeling indicates that the project site parcel could be vulnerable to the effects of SLR, the model does not consider changes in flooding behavior due to the existing seawall shore protection system. The existing seawall is identified as protection from SLR, one of the primary sea level rise adaptation strategies outlined by the Guidance for Using the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area in Local Planning and Permitting Dec' ons (Romine, et. al. 2020). The top of the existing sea wall is approximately five to seven feet above current sea level along the project site. Therefore, the existing sea wall could provide some level of protection to the project site against flooding not currently shown in the SLR-XA modeling. Because the proposed pavilion would be set back further from the shoreline than it is currently, the proposed project would reduce sea level rise exposure under the 3.2 feet scenario compared to existing conditions. Considering the existing protection from the sea wall, the project site includes features that could lower future risks from sea level rise. 20 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement a . IEt 71 v+ a t; aQNIF x FLOOD HAZALRD ASSESSMENT TOOL LATER LEGEND I Note.- tegend does not correspond with NFHL) - SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREAS (SFHAsj SUBJECT TO INUNDATION BY THE 1% ANNUAL CHANCE FLOOD - The 1% annual chance flood (100- vear), also know as the base flood, is the flood that has a 1% chance Of ❑eing equaled or exceeded in any given year- SFHA5 induce Zane A, AE, AH, AO, V, and VE- The Base Flood Elevation (BFE) is the water surface elevation of the 1% annual chance flood- Mandatory flood insurance purchase applies In 1he5e zones: ZoneAE: BFE determined. Zone VE: Coastal flood zone with velocity hazard (wave action); BFE determined. - -+� NON -SPECIAL FLOOD HAZARD AREA - An area in a law -to -moderate risk flood zone. No mandatary flood insurance purchase requirements apply, but coverage is available in parnopating communities - FM• ^a m Zane X: Areas determined to be outside the 0.2%annual chance 0 200 400ft fl0odplaln. •E POND A t FLOOD LIMITS 1 / 5—F1 WIDE ACCESSIBLE CONCRETE WALKWAY • 25' 0'Ir t NEW CMMUN PAVILIONITY 0 EXIST COURTS TO BE I RESURFACED BOAT GRAPHIC SCALE: TURNAROUND s AREA OM FOR ATION(77 -,PLAYGROUND— w Y — i .--NEW COMFORT STATION & POTABLE LIMITS OF NEW (EL 7) a WATER SYSTEM AC PAVEMENT I a SOURCE: Hawaii National Flood Insurance Program 2019 Wiloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Figure 5 Flood Hazard Map Draft Environmental Assessment 3.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES The project parcel consists of a 1.41-acre area that has been highly modified and developed with park facilities and parking areas. Vegetation at the beach park project area includes Ironwood trees, milo trees, coconut palms, nom plants, and night -blooming cereus. There are several Ironwood trees and ornamental plants surrounded by rock rings throughout the site. This area provides habitat for common animals, including, but not limited to, birds, mongoose, feral cats and dogs, and mice and rats. Due to the previously disturbed nature of the project site, the project site has limited potential for sensitive biological resources to occur. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) submitted comments on the Draft EA (see Appendix A, Draft EA Comment Letters). The USFWS identified ten listed species that could occur in the immediate vicinity of the project area: the federally endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the threatened Hawaiian goose, endangered Hawaiian stilt, endangered Hawaiian coot, endangered Hawaiian duck, the threatened Green sea turtle, endangered Hawksbill sea turtle, endangered Hawaiian yellow -faced bees, endangered Procaris hawaiana, endangered IVeteracaras chaceorum, endangered Pacific damselfly, and the endangered Orange -black. Additionally, the endangered Hawaiian petrel, band-rumped storm -petrel, and the threatened Newell's shearwater may transit the project area flying to upland breeding colonies. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES While the project site is highly modified and developed with park facilities, construction activities would result in short-term disturbances to wildlife in the project vicinity. Potential impacts to protected species that may occur in the project area as identified by the USFWS are described below. Hawaiian hoary bat. The federally endangered Hawaiian hoary bat roosts in both exotic and native woody vegetation across all islands and will leave young unattended in trees and shrubs when they forage. If trees or shrubs 15 feet or taller are cleared during the pupping season, there is a risk that young bats could inadvertently be harmed or killed since they are too young to fly or may not move away. Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can become entangled in barbed wire used for fencing. To avoid and minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat, the USFWS provides the following recommendations: • Do not disturb, remove, or trim woody plants greater than 15 feet tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). • Do not use barbed wire for fencing. Hawaiian goose. The federally threatened Hawaiian goose (nerve) are observed in a variety of habitats, but prefer open areas, such as pastures, golf courses, wetlands, natural grasslands and shrublands, and lava flows. Threats to the species include introduced mammalian and avian predators, wind facilities, and vehicle strikes. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian geese, the USFWS provides the following recommendations: Do not approach, feed, or disturb Hawaiian geese. 22 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment • If Hawaiian geese are observed loafing or foraging within the project area during the breeding season (September through April), have a biologist familiar with the nesting behavior of nene survey for nests in and around the project area prior to the resumption of any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). 0 Cease all work immediately and contact the USFWS for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed work, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within said radius after work begins. • In areas where Hawaiian geese are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on -site. Green and Hawksbill sea turtles. The green sea turtle that occurs in Hawaii is federally -listed as a threatened species and as a threatened subspecies under Hawaii regulations. Hawksbill sea turtle is much less common in the Hawaiian Islands than green sea turtle and is known to nest only in the southern reaches of the state. Hawksbill sea turtle is federally -listed as endangered and is also listed as an endangered subspecies under Hawaii regulations. Construction on, or in the vicinity of, beaches can result in sand and sediment compaction, sea turtle nest destruction, beach erosion, contaminant and nutrient runoff, and an increase in direct and ambient light pollution which may disorient hatchlings or deter nesting females. Off -road vehicle traffic may result in direct impacts to sea turtles and nests, and also contributes to habitat degradation through erosion and compaction. Nesting turtles may be deterred from approaching or laying successful nests on lighted or disturbed beaches. No construction would occur at the shoreline with implementation of the project. The replacement pavilion would be approximately 22 feet set back from the existing sea wall, and the end of the new path at the BBQ area is approximately 20 feet from the shoreline. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to sea turtles and their nests, the USFWS provides the following applicable recommendations: • Implement site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description and as recommended by the USFWS. • Have a biologist familiar with sea turtles conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present. 0 If a basking sea turtle is found within the project area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. • Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season (May to December). • Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project -related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, and Hawaiian duck. Listed Hawaiian waterbirds are found in fresh and brackish -water marshes and natural or man-made ponds. Hawaiian stilts may also be found wherever standing water may occur. Hawaiian waterbirds attracted to sub -optimal habitat such as ponding water may suffer adverse impacts, such as predation and reduced reproductive Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 23 Draft Environmental Assessment success, and thus the project may create an attractive nuisance. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian waterbirds, the USFWS provides the following recommendations, as applicable: In areas where waterbirds are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on -site. Implement site -specific 13MPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description and as recommended by the USFWS Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site prior to project initiation. Repeat surveys again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). If a nest or active brood is found: 0 Contact the Service within 48 hours for further guidance. Establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged. Do not conduct potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer. 0 Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. Hawaiian petrel, Newell's shearwater, and band-rumped storm petrel. Hawaiian seabirds may traverse the project area at night during the breeding, nesting and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Outdoor lighting could result in seabird disorientation, fallout, and injury or mortality. Seabirds are attracted to lights and after circling the lights they may become exhausted and collide with nearby wires, buildings, or other structures or they may land on the ground. Downed seabirds are subject to increased mortality due to collision with automobiles, starvation, and predation by dogs, cats, and other predators. Young birds (fledglings) traversing the project area between September 15 and December 15, in their first flights from their mountain nests to the sea, are particularly vulnerable. The proposed project includes minimal additional nighttime lighting for the restrooms, security lighting for the pavilion, and area lighting along the accessible paths. Project design would reduce nighttime glare effects with low level footpath lighting and timered lights. All lighting would be properly shaded to ensure that artificial light does not travel across property boundaries or toward the shoreline and ocean waters pursuant to HRS Section 205A-30.5(a) and 205A-2(c)(10). Therefore, adverse effects to seabirds due to nighttime lighting would be minimized with project features. Hawaiian yellow -faced bee. Coastal populations of yellow -faced bees occur in habitat along rocky shorelines with naupaka and tree heliotrope with either landscaped vegetation, alien kiawe, or bare rock inland. Threats to yellow -faced bees include habitat destruction and modification from land use change, nonnative plants, ungulates, and fire, along with predation by nonnative ants and wasps. To avoid and minimize project impacts to yellow -faced bees and their nests, the USFWS provides the following recommendations, as applicable: 24 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment • If an action will occur in or adjacent to known occupied habitat, a buffer area around the habitat may be required and can be worked out on a site -specific basis through consultation with the Service. • For coastal species, protect all coastal strand habitat from human disturbance, including: 0 No fires or wood collecting 0 Leave woody debris in place 0 Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails 0 Post educational signs to inform people of the presence of sensitive species. Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris hawaiana and Vetericaris chaceorum), Hawaiian damselfly, Orangeblack Hawaiian damselfly. These anchialine pool shrimp are found in seepage -fed pools or anchialine pools and coastal wetlands, and Hawaiian damselflies are found in aquatic habitats across the islands. Breeding habitat for the damselfly includes anchialine pools, perennial streams, marshes, ponds, and even artificial pools and seeps. The USFWS recommended, site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description would minimize the degradation of water quality and impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Since no work would occur within any water bodies, no surveys for this species would be required. Anchialine Pools. P. hawaiana is restricted to a small number of anchialine pools on Hawaii and Maui, while V. chaceoruw is found in only two anchialine pool areas of Hawaii. Threats to these species include habitat loss due to in -filling and bulldozing of anchialine pools, waste disposal including used oil and grease into pools, nonnative fish, human use of pools for bathing, water extraction, in -flow of fertilizer and pesticides, and collection for the aquarium trade. The USFWS recommended, site -specific BMPs regarding sedimentation and erosion in aquatic environments identified in the project description would minimize the degradation of water quality and impacts to fish and wildlife resources. The USFWS provides the following additional recommendations, as applicable: • Protect anchialine pools (both in and around) from the following human disturbance: 0 Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails 0 Prevent trash, and other waste from entering into anchialine pools 0 Avoid or limit to the maximum extent practicable entrance into the anchialine pools • Install educational signs near anchialine pools to inform people of the presence of sensitive species and habitats. Sumnarg Temporary effects during construction would include increased traffic, noise, and overall activity, which could result in short-term disturbances to plants and wildlife in the project vicinity. During construction, site -specific BMPs developed as part of the permitting process and avoidance measures included in this section would minimize erosion and sedimentation and potential adverse effects to wildlife in the vicinity of the project site. No adverse long-term effects to biological resources would occur with implementation of minimization measures above. 3.5 HISTORIC, ARCHAEOLOGICAL, AND CULTURAL RESOURCES An Archaeological Inventory Survey (AIS) was completed for the project site (Haun & Associates 2022). The objective of the AIS is to satisfy current historic preservation regulatory review inventory Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 25 Draft Environmental Assessment requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD), as contained within Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR, Subtitle 13, Chapters 275 and 276, State Historic Preservation Rules. In order to assess the potential for encountering archaeological or historic resources, the archaeological survey included the following: • Relevant archaeological and historical documents were reviewed (including examination of Land Commission Awards, ahupua`a records, historic maps, archival materials, archaeological reports, and a high -intensity pedestrian survey of the project area was completed. • A detailed recording of all potentially significant sites was completed. • Limited subsurface testing was conducted to assess the potential for cultural materials. • Background research and field data were analyzed to determine significance Much of the information in the archaeological survey was obtained from Pa a Pono Miloli `i. The following sections are summarized from the AIS. Historical Background The project area is located in the ahupua`a of Miloli`i in the district of South Kona. Miloli`i is translated as a "fine twist" (Wehewehe.org), in reference to an expert sennit twister from the area who created cordage from olana bark that was used to make fishing nets. There is an alternative translation for Miloli`i, or "small swirling," which is in probable reference to ocean currents in the area. Established as a settlement dating back to the early Polynesian seafarers from the South Pacific, Miloli`i families have been fishing the offshore and nearshore waters for generations. The project area is located in a traditional sub -district of South Kona called Kapalilua. There are several early historic references to the remote area. According to Fornander in "An Account of the Polynesian Race" (1885), Kapalilua was given to Napunanahunui-a-Umi, daughter of Umi, and these lands were held by her descendants until the arrival of Kamehameha L It is noted that Kamehameha I apparently visited the Kapalilua area due to his love of `ahi fishing. The lands of Kapalilua were later given to a displaced Maui chief, Keaweaheulu, for his assistance to Kalani`opu`u during battles with Kahekili between 1777 and 1779. In the 1840s, the Great Mahele redistributed land as proposed by King Kamehameha III. A third of the land was relocated to the monarch as Hawaiian crown lands. Another third was allocated among the ali`i and konohiki (chiefs and managers of the ahupuaa). The remaining third was given to the makaainana (common people). However, the law required land claims to be filed within two years under the Kuleana Act of 1850, and many Hawaiians made no claim. The Kuleana Act also allowed foreigners to purchase fee simple lands. During the Mahele, four Land Commission Award (LCA) claims were made for parcels within Miloli`i Ahupua`a. There are no records of LCAs within the project area. The project area has been historically affected by tsunamis. According to records, 22 tsunamis impacted the Hawaiian Islands between 1819 and 1975. The Miloli`i area was impacted by tsunamis in 1868, 1946, 1957, and 1960. The 1868 tsunami destroyed the entire village of Miloli`i, though no lives were lost. 26 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Project Site Features The Hau`oli Kamana`o Congregational Church is located adjacent to the project site on the inland side of the Miloli`i Road. According to the Pa a Pono Miloli `i website, the church was constructed in 1865 under the direction of Reverend Paris. The current Miloli`i Road, that extends along the inland side of the project area, existed as early as 1914. The project site is the former location of the Miloli`i School, which closed in 1966; the land was conveyed to the County of Hawaii in 1969. According to Jeff Ochi, Project Parks Manager for the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation, the school structures were removed when it was closed; however, the basketball court was in existence when the school was in operation. The restroom facility was constructed in late 1986/early 1987, and the covered pavilion was built before 2006. Previous Archaeological Research A search of the DLNR archives indicates that at least 15 archaeological studies have been conducted in the general vicinity of the project area. Two sites were identified in the Miloli`i area consisting of several graves and a pool and the district of Miloli`i. According to information presented in an environmental assessment for the Miloli`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center (Farber & Associates 2012), the project area and surrounding vicinity were surveyed between 1973 and 1974 during the Statewide Inventory of Historic Places Survey. However, there was little information availabe from SHPD on sites identified in the area. Consultation As part of the environmental analysis completed for a previous project in Miloli`i, a series of oral history interviews were conducted with seven kupuna (elder) raised in Kapalilua with the primary aim of examining changes in the traditional fishing practices of the region (Maly and Maly 2003). Nearly all of the interviewees commented on changes they had observed in the quality of the fisheries, and the declining abundance of fish —noting that there were significant declines in almost all areas of the fisheries, from near -shore to the deep sea. No specific information regarding the Miloli`i School or project site in particular was included. The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important community resource. The Halau pavilion was built by the community before 2006, and is used for community gatherings and as a community library and education center. The beach park is used by the local community for a variety of recreational and cultural activities, including sports, swimming and snorkeling, fishing, and camping. In efforts to ensure the local community was involved in discussions regarding the proposed beach park accessibility improvements, the Department of Parks and Recreation scheduled community meetings at the Halau pavilion on October 18, 2019, and November 3, 2019. Due to the circumstances of COVID-19, a third meeting was delayed until May 16, 2021, to follow-up on community concerns previously identified (these meetings are summarized in Section 6.2 of this EA and written comments from the community are included in Appendix A). A frequently identified concern was that the project was changing the park with the intention for increased tourist visitation. As communicated at the community meetings, the proposed project was initiated to meet the federal mandate for ADA compliance; the project would not make any changes to the existing uses of the beach park, and the Halau pavilion would remain under control of the community. The intended use of the park is for the Miloli`i Village community. An additional informal meeting on June 21, 2022 with park staff and several members of the community identified some specific design needs of Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 27 Draft Environmental Assessment the new PV electrical system, the need for a service window at the pavilion, and insulation in the pavilion storage area to minimize heat build-up. The Department of Parks and Recreation will continue to work with the community during implementation of the accessibility improvements project. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The archaeological inventory survey identified three historic single feature sites. These project site features consist of an erosion control retaining wall, a discontinuous boundary wall, and an historic basketball court. The retaining wall functions to prevent coastal erosion, while the boundary wall separates the project area from an adjacent house lot. The basketball court represents the only surviving remnant of the actual school facility, and based on County records, the court is at least 50 years old, making it an historic property. The mapping, written description and photography of the three sites provide adequate documentation, and no further work or preservation is required. The SHPD completed Chapter 6E-8 Historic Preservation Review for the project and transmitted their determination dated July 18, 2022 to the Department of Parks and Recreation. The SHPD determined that the AIS report prepared for the project satisfied the requirements of HAR Section 13-276-5, and accepted the conclusions found therein. (See Appendix B for the SHPD letter and a copy of the AIS.) Based on the preceding information, limited remnants of the historic Miloli`i School, excluding the basketball court, remain within the project area. The effects of multiple tsunamis and the historic impacts to the property by the construction and use of the school suggests that no pre -contact archaeological sites or features are likely to be encountered. While there is low probability of encountering archaeological sites in this area, in the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, are identified during the construction activities, all work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find would be protected from additional disturbance, and the State Historic Preservation Division would be notified pursuant to Section 13-280-3, HAR. In the event that iw' kupuna and/or cultural finds are encountered during construction, cultural and lineal descendants of the area should be consulted to develop a reinterment plan and cultural preservation plan for proper cultural protocol, curation, and long-term maintenance.With documentation of these sites, no adverse effect to cultural, historic, or archaeological resources would occur. The State of Hawai`i's environmental review process also requires consideration of the proposed project's potential effects on cultural practices and cultural features in order to "promote responsible decision making" (Section 343, HRS). These cultural practices and features may include traditional cultural properties, which are designated significant historic properties that "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" (Sections 13-275-6 and 13-284-6, HAR). The intent of the assessment is to "analyze the impact of a proposed action on cultural practices and features associated with the project area" (Office of Environmental Quality Control 1997). The County aims to provide ongoing beach park access during construction of the proposed improvements. If access to the boat turn around is limited any time during construction, the village community would be notified in advance. Because the proposed project represents a continuation of existing uses and would not negatively impact access to the shoreline, or affect designated significant historic properties, it is reasonable to conclude that, pursuant to Act 50, the exercise of Native Hawaiian rights, or any ethnic group, 28 Milofi `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment related to gathering, access, or other customary activities within the project area would not be affected, and there would be no direct adverse effect upon cultural practices or beliefs. 3.6 AIR QUALITY AND CLIMATE Hawaii receives most of its precipitation during the winter months (October to April). Flooding is more likely during this wet period, and stream flows decrease during drier conditions from May to September. The temperature in the general area ranges from 65 to 80 degrees Fahrenheit (F), with a mean annual average of approximately 72.5 degrees F (U.S. Climate Data 2019). Mean annual rainfall in the project area is about 30 inches (Giambelluca et. al. 2013). The Department of Health, Clean Air Branch (CAB), monitors the ambient air in the State of Hawaii for various gaseous and particulate air pollutants. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has set national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for six criteria pollutants: carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, sulfur dioxide, lead, ozone, and particulate matter (PMio and PM2.5). Hawaii has established state ambient air standards for all of these pollutants (except for PM2.5) in addition to hydrogen sulfide, a product of volcanic emissions (CAB 2020). The primary purpose of the statewide monitoring network is to measure ambient air concentrations of these pollutants and ensure that these air quality standards are met. In 2020, there were 11 air monitoring stations on the island of Hawaii. The majority of stations are located on the island of Hawaii to measure air quality impacts from the volcano and geothermal energy production. There are monitoring stations located in Ocean View and Kona, in the general vicinity of the project site. According to the State of Hawaii Department of Health Annual Summary 2020 Air Quality Data, criteria and pollutant levels in the State remained below all federal and state ambient air quality standards (excluding exceedances due to volcanic activity) (CAB 2020). IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Construction of the proposed project could result in temporary air quality effects, including exhaust emissions from construction vehicles and dust generated by short-term construction related activities. Components of construction emissions include employee trips, exhaust emissions from construction equipment, and fugitive dust emissions. Earthwork and grading within the project area could generate airborne dust particulates. Dust control measures such as watering and sprinkling will be implemented as needed to minimize wind-blown dust. To minimize construction -related exhaust emissions, project contractors will ensure that all internal combustion engines are maintained in proper working order. All construction work will be in conformance with the air pollution control standards contained in HAR, Title 11, Chapter 59, "Ambient Air Quality Standards," and Chapter 60, "Air Pollution Control," which would minimize air quality emissions. Once completed, the proposed accessibility improvements are not anticipated to result in increased beach park visitation and associated vehicle trips. The proposed project would not result in any increased air emissions, and there would be no long-term adverse air quality impacts associated with the proposed action. Other than vehicles visiting the project site, there are no air contaminant sources in the immediate project area. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 29 Draft Environmental Assessment 3.7 NOISE The project site is located in the coastal community of Miloli`i, with the church to the east, a residence to the south, and tidal pools of the Pacific Ocean to the west and north. Surrounding noise levels in the vicinity of the project site are considered relatively low. Existing noise sources include the sound of the wind and ocean, occasional vehicular traffic on Miloli`i Road, and church events. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Noise impacts from a project can be categorized as those resulting from construction and those from operational activities. Construction noise would have a short-term effect; operational noise would continue throughout the lifetime of the project. Implementation of the proposed accessibility improvements could temporarily increase noise levels during construction. Noise from construction activities is regulated under Title 11, Chapter 46, Community Noise Control, of the State DOH's Administrative Rules. The zoning district classification and maximum permissible sound levels are outlined in HAR Section 11-46-4. The project falls under the Class A zoning district category that applies to properties zoned for public space, open space, and conservation types of land uses. The maximum permissible noise level for this site under Class A is 55 dBA at the property line during daytime and 45 dBA during nighttime. Typical ranges of construction equipment noise vary between 70 and 95 dBA. Therefore, earthmoving activities could temporarily increase noise levels during construction above maximum allowable limits that would impact nearby existing uses. A Community Noise Permit for construction activities may be required by the Department of Health. Prior to construction, consultation with the state Department of Health will occur to determine permitting requirements. Should the permit be required, allowable construction conditions will be specified. Construction will be confined to 7 a.m. to 6 p.m., Monday through Friday, and 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on Saturday. No construction activities exceeding maximum allowable noise levels will occur on Sundays and holidays without prior notice. Construction activities will comply with HAR Chapter 11-46, Community Noise Control. There would be no long-term increase in noise during project operations since the project accessibility improvements would not generate additional traffic and associated noise. 3.8 VISUAL RESOURCES The project area includes basic recreational facilities located along the coast. The project site consists of a covered pavilion, a basketball/volleyball court, parking areas, a restroom, and firepits. From the project site, there are views of tidal pools and Miloli`i Bay in the short and long range. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES During construction, workers, materials, and equipment would be visible from the church to the east and the residence to the south, and from motorists on Miloli`i Road. Visual impacts during construction would be temporary and intermittent. The proposed project would introduce minimal additional lighting to the project site for the restrooms and area lighting along accessible paths. Because of the isolated nature of the project site and unlit night sky ideal for nighttime star visibility, these lights could produce nighttime glare 30 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment effects. Project design would reduce nighttime glare effects with low level footpath lighting and timered lights. All lighting would be properly shaded to eliminate light trespass and preserve the isolated and dark environmental of the project area. Therefore, potential light and glare impacts from project lighting would be less than significant. Since the proposed project consists of accessibility improvements and replacement of existing uses at the Miloli`i Beach Park, the proposed project would not significantly change the scenic and visual character of the surrounding area. 3.9 SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS In both urban and rural areas, the County of Hawaii has relatively low population density, though there has been a marked growth in population. In 2017, the population in the South Kona District included an estimated 11,193 persons, with 3,949 persons in the Captain Cook area (DBEDT 2019). From 2010 to 2017, there was a 12 percent increase in population for the district, which is the second most of all the places in the area (Captain Cook showed a 15.2 percent increase in population, while the state of Hawaii only experienced a 4.5 percent increase in population). In 2017, the Pa a Pono Miloli `i website estimated that the village of Miloli`i has about 200 residents (Pa`a Pono Miloli`i 2017). The population has increased since that time, with a community estimate of between 270 to 300 residents in the village alone as of March 2020, and over 500 people in the surrounding community. The major economic activity for the South Kona district is agricultural, with its most important industries being coffee growing and processing, macadamia nuts, citrus fruits and cattle ranching (Hawaii County 2005). Other commodities include bananas, citrus crops, avocados, and vegetables and other truck crops. The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important recreational facility for residents in the area. According to the County of Hawaii General Plan, the South Kona District, compared to other districts, has fewer County facilities -based parks and beach parks in relation to the population (Hawaii County 2005). There are four developed beach parks and two beach park reserves in the district. Miloli`i Landing, north of the Beach Park, is on state lands and contains a rocky shoreline and a boat ramp. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project is not anticipated to have significant, adverse impacts on the social and economic characteristics of the area. The proposed improvements would enhance the existing recreational facilities and provide handicap accessible features. The proposed project improvements would not generate any new permanent full-time jobs. Therefore, the primary economic effects would be associated with short-term construction jobs that would generate a small minor positive economic impact. Implementation of the proposed action would not displace any residents or businesses since construction would occur within the existing footprint of the park facilities. Improvements planned under the proposed accessibility improvements project would not impact the number of housing units in the surrounding area and surrounding community of Miloli`i because no housing units are included under this project. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 31 Draft Environmental Assessment 3.10 UTILITIES AND PUBLIC SERVICES The Miloli`i Beach Park is not served by any utility services. Electricity is provided by solar panels with battery storage on the existing pavilion. Water for the comfort station is provided by privately operated water supply trucks. This water is non -potable and is only used to flush toilets and hand sinks. The project site is served by an on -site septic system. The park pavilion is the only public facility in the Miloli`i community that is covered and can accommodate large groups for gatherings and events (Farber and Associates 2012). The nearest fire 24-hour fire/EMS operations are located at Keauhou and Captain Cook. There is a volunter fire station located in Miloli`i Village. There is a Hawaii County Police Department station in Kailua-Kona, approximately 40 miles north of the project site, and a Na`alehu Station, approximately 30 miles south of the project site. The Kona Community Hospital is afull-service hospital located in Kealakehe, approximately 30 miles from the project site. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The proposed project includes the replacement of existing facilities and accessibility improvements at the Miloli`i Beach Park. The proposed project includes provision of a new potable water storage system, including a water tank and booster pump(s), for the new comfort station. Potable water would be delivered by truck. No feature of the project would result in the need for new or altered services for fire or police protection, schools, libraries, parks, or health services. Because no new residences would be constructed on site, and no new employees would be drawn from the local labor pool, no increase in population would result from the proposed project. Therefore, no increases in the demands for public services such as schools, libraries, parks, health services, police, or fire protection would be expected, and no additional public facilities would need to be constructed. Further, activities at the proposed beach park accessibility improvements project site would not affect the provision of utilities and public services to adjacent land uses. Replacement of existing facilities and accessibility improvements planned are expected to have no negative long-term impact on utilities and public services. For information regarding storm drainage, see Section IX, Hydrology and W�YlaterQuality. 3.11 TRAFFIC AND PARKING Miloli`i is a small, isolated village located approximately 45 miles from the Kona International Airport. Vehicle access to the project area is via Miloli`i Road, a steep road that descends roughly 3,400 feet in elevation off of Mamalahoa Highway (Highway 11). Miloll'i Road is a winding, two-lane country road, and Miloli`i Beach Park is located approximately 5 miles along this roadway. IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES Construction of the proposed project could result in short-term increases in traffic. During construction of the proposed park accessibility improvements, there would be work vehicles using Miloli`i Road. There is limited traffic on Miloli`i Road, consisting of local traffic or beach visitor traffic. However, the County aims to provide ongoing beach parking and access during construction of the proposed improvements. Temporary parking during construction would likely be onsite or along Miloli`i Road. During construction, the construction contractor would be required to provide for boat turn -around and ensure access to the residential property in the back of the park. 32 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment The proposed project includes a parking area with 12 standard parking spaces and four handicapped spaces (including 1 van space), in addition to a paved area for boat turnaround. The project also includes installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. These barriers would not prevent access to the existing residence. There would be no direct increase in operational traffic due to implementation of the proposed project, and no long-term adverse effects to circulation and parking would occur. 3.12 CONFORMANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL PLANS, POLICIES, AND LAND USE CONTROLS State and County policy, and land use and community plans and controls are established to address the long-term physical, social, economic, and environmental needs in Hawaii. Pertinent land use controls for the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement project are described below. State of Hawai `i State of Hawaii, Land Use Commission — State Land Use Districts HRS, Chapter 205, establishes four major land use districts in which all lands in the State are placed. These districts include: urban, rural, agricultural, and conservation. The Conservation District has five subzones: Protective, Limited, Resource, General, and Special. Excluding the Special subzone, the four subzones are arranged in a hierarchy of environmental sensitivity, ranging from the most environmentally sensitive (Protective) to the least sensitive (General). These subzones define a set of identified land uses that may be allowed by discretionary permit as regulated by HAR, Chapter 13-5, "Conservation District" and HRS, Chapter 183C. The project site is located within the "Conservation" (C) District with a subzone designation of "Special" (see Figure 6). The objective of the special subzone is to provide for sustainable use of areas possessing unique developmental qualities that complement the natural resources of the area (HAR, Section 13-5-15). The project site is located in the Miloli`i-Hoopuloa special subzone (Chapter 13-5, Exhibit 2, Special Subzones (5)). The purposes of this subzone designation include fishing activities, residential, educational, and cultural and recreational uses pursuant to Act 86, SLH 1991. The proposed project would not expand the park or its facilities beyond what currently exists. Besides the demolition and relocation of the restrooms, pavilion, and water storage structures, most of the proposed improvements involves minor alterations or cosmetic work to existing structures. Based on consultation with DLNR, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL), the proposed project is an identified land use pursuant to HAR, Section 13-5-22 P-8 Structures and Land Uses, Existing (B-1): Demolition, removal, or minor alteration of existing structures, facilities, land, and equpment. Any historic property shall be evaluated by the departmentfor historical significance. As noted by OCCL, construction of the proposed accessibility improvements would require filing a Site Plan Approval application, including proof of SHPD consultation (see Appendix A). The SHPD completed Chapter 6E-8 Historic Preservation Review for the project and transmitted their determination to the Department of Parks and Recreation in an email dated July 25, 2022. The SHPD determined that the AIS report prepared for the project satisfied the requirements of HAR Section 13-276-5, and accepted the conclusions found therein. (See Appendix B for the SHPD letter and a copy of the AIS.) Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 33 Draft Environmental Assessment Background Information on Land Use Controls in the Miloli`i Area Miloli`i has been established as a settlement dating back to the early Polynesian seafarers from the South Pacific. In 1931, the territorial governor set aside the area as a public park under the control of the County government (Executive Order (EO) 473). With EO 473, the governor gave the County full authority to create a "Hawaiian Village" at Miloli`i (Pa`a Pono Miloll'i 2017). In 1982, the state legislature approved Act 62 which authorized DLNR to, "negotiate and enter into long- term residential leases," with residents living at Miloli`i and others who were displaced by the 1926 lava flow. Act 83, passed in 1984, granted a time extension to Act 62. On June 22, 1984, the Board of Land and Natural Resources approved the establishment of the Miloli`i-Ho`opuloa Special Subzone within Conservation District lands under Conservation District Use Permit (CDUP) HA- 1653, dated January 12, 1984. The Miloli`i-Ho`opuloa Community Development Plan Master Plan was created by Pa `a Pono Miloli `i and approved by the Land Board in 1984. The Master Plan included two phases of residential development in addition to areas for cultural, recreational, or educational purposes, located north of the Miloli`i Beach Park. In line with the Master Plan's vision, the Final Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for the Miloli`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center was issued by the County of Hawaii Planning Department in July 2012 for the development of a multi -purpose community center within the Miloli`i Village (Farber & Associates 2012). Separate from these actions, the Miloli`i Beach Park was created by Executive Order 2435 and has been under the management of the County of Hawaii since 1985 (see OCCL consultation letter, Appendix A). 34 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement HAKALAU FOREST NATIONAL q� WILDLIFE REFUGE S. KONA SEC —\ 1 - HAWAII F VOLCANOES F} _ NATIONAL PARK SOUTH K RESERVE (KUKUIOPA SEC.) SOUTH KONA FOREST RES. (OLELOMOANA OPIHIHALI SEC.) KIPAHOEHOE NATURAL AREA RESERVE KONA HEMA PRESERVE MANUKA AESEavE 0 NATURAL AREA RESERVE Legend Hawaii Tax Map Key - 2012 Conservation Subzone Conservation GENERAL LIMITED PROTECTED RESOURCE WM SPECIAL KAU FOREST RESERVE Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: State of Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural Resources, Figure 6 Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, 2012 State Land Use District Map Conservation District, Special Subzone Draft Environmental Assessment Hawaii State Planning Act, HRS Chapter 226 The Hawaii State Planning Act (HRS Chapter 226) is a broad policy document that forms a basis for all activities, programs, and decisions made by local and state agencies. The Act sets forth the Hawaii State Plan, which is a long-range comprehensive plan that identifies the goals, objectives, policies, and priorities for the state, and provides a basis for determining priorities and allocating limited resources. The objectives and policies focus on general topic areas, including population, economy, physical environment, facility systems, and socio-cultural advancement. The proposed accessibility improvements project is compatible with applicable objectives and policies, and priority guidelines listed in HRS Chapter 226, as discussed below. Hawaii State Planning Act, HRS Chapter 226 Objective or Policy Consistency Discussion 226-11(a). Planning for the State's physical environment Yes The proposed Miloli`i Beach Park with regard to land -based, shoreline, and marine resources Accessibility Improvement project would shall be directed towards achievement of the following reconstruct existing recreation facilities objectives: and provide ADA accessible walkways (1) Prudent use of Hawaii's land -based, shoreline, and and parking. The proposed project BMPs marine resources. and mitigation measures would minimize (2) Effective protection of Hawaii's unique and fragile impacts to shoreline and marine resources. environmental resources. 226-11(b). To achieve the land -based, shoreline, and marine resources objectives, it shall be the policy of this State to: (1) Exercise an overall conservation ethic in the use of Hawaii's natural resources. (4) Manage natural resources and environs to encourage their beneficial and multiple use without generating costly or irreparable environmental damage. (6) Encourage the protection of rare or endangered plant and animal species and habitats native to Hawaii. (8) Pursue compatible relationships among activities, facilities, and natural resources. (9) Promote increased accessibility and prudent use of inland and shoreline areas for public recreational, educational, and scientific purposes. 226-12(b). To achieve the scenic, natural beauty, and Yes As set forth in Section 3.5, Histwic, historic resources objective, it shall be the policy of this Archaeological, and Cultural Resources, an State to: Archaeological Inventory Survey was (1) Promote the preservation and restoration of completed for the project site. The significant natural and historic resources. archaeological inventory survey identified three historic single feature sites. The mapping, written description, and photography of these sites adequately document them and no further work or preservation is required. 36 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Hawaii State Planning Act, HRS Chapter 226 Objective or Policy Consistency Discussion �226-13(a). Planning for the State's physical environment Yes As set forth in Section 5, Findings and with regard to land, air, and water quality shall be directed Deterlvination , of this EA, no significant towards achievement of the following objectives: adverse effects to air quality or water (1) Maintenance and pursuit of improved quality in quality would occur with implementation Hawaii's land, air, and water resources. of the proposed accessibility (2) Greater public awareness and appreciation of Hawaii's improvements project. environmental resources. (b) To achieve the land, air, and water quality objectives, Yes As described in Section 3.3, Natural it shall be the policy of this State to: Ha.Zard, of this EA, the entire shoreline is (2) Promote the proper management of Hawaii's land and subject to inundation due to high seas and water resources. swells caused by hurricanes and distant (3) Promote effective measures to achieve desired quality storms and tsunami activity. While most of the facilities are not located within the in Hawaii's surface, ground, and coastal waters. flood zone, the proposed improvements (5) Reduce the threat to life and property from erosion, would be designed and constructed in flooding, tsunamis, hurricanes, earthquakes, volcanic conformance with the standards and eruptions, and other natural or man -induced hazards requirements of the Hawaii County Code, and disasters. Chapter 27, Flood plain Management, as applicable. In addition, the project includes BMPs to be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion and potential impacts to water quality. �226-23 (a). Planning for the State's socio-cultural Yes The proposed project includes advancement with regard to leisure shall be directed accessibility improvements to meet ADA towards the achievement of the objective of the adequate requirements and provide equitable access provision of resources to accommodate diverse cultural, to the beach park amenities. artistic, and recreational needs for present and future generations. (b) To achieve the leisure objective, it shall be the policy of this State to: (3) Enhance the enjoyment of recreational experiences through safety and security measures, educational opportunities, and improved facility design and maintenance. (5) Ensure opportunities for everyone to use and enjoy Hawaii's recreational resources. (6) Assure the availability of sufficient resources to provide for future cultural, artistic, and recreational needs. (10) Assure adequate access to significant natural and cultural resources in public ownership. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 37 Draft Environmental Assessment Coastal Zone Management Program In October 1972, Congress passed the Coastal Zone Management Act for the purpose of establishing a national program for the management, beneficial use, protection, and development of land and water resources of the coastal areas of the United States. The Hawaii Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program (HRS, Chapter 205A) was promulgated in 1977 in response to the Federal Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972. The objectives and policies of the CZM Program are to provide recreational resources; protect historic, scenic, and coastal ecosystem resources; provide economic uses; reduce coastal hazards; and manage development in the coastal zone. All lands in the state of Hawaii are located within the coastal zone management area. Speczal ManagewentArea Designation and Shoreline Setback Rules The CZM Program outlines controls and policies within an area along the shoreline called the Special Management Area (SMA). The objectives of the SMA are "the maintenance, restoration, and enhancement of the overall quality of the coastal zone environment, including, but not limited to, its amenities and aesthetic values, and to provide adequate public access to publicly owned or used beaches, recreation areas and national reserves." The purpose of the SMA Permit is to regulate any use, activity or operation that qualifies as a "development" and is administered at the County level — the permit is a management tool to ensure activities within the SMA are carried out in compliance with the CZM objectives and policies, and SMA guidelines. The project site is located within the SMA boundary (see Figure 7). Consultation with the County of Hawaii Planning Department was initiated at the time of early consultation and EA preparation. It is anticipated that an SMA Major permit would be necessary, based on the project valuation and preliminary understanding of the project scope. The proposed action requires compliance with the Shoreline Setback Rules of the County of Hawaii Planning Department (Planning Department Rule 11-5). The shoreline at the project site generally follows the edge of the seawall or the high wash of waves at the beach area (a Shoreline Certification application was approved October 31, 2019, see Appendix C). The Shoreline Setback area is the area between the shoreline and the shoreline setback line established by the County. Structures or portions of a structure are not permitted in the shoreline setback area without a variance, and conditions must be imposed to maintain safe lateral access to and along the shoreline or adequately compensate for its loss; to minimize risk of adverse impacts on beach processes, to minimize risk of structures failing and becoming loose rocks or rubble on public property; and to minimize adverse impacts on public views to, from, and along the shoreline. The replacement pavilion would be approximately 22 feet set back from the existing sea wall, and the end of the new path at the BBQ area is approximately 20 feet from the shoreline. A portion of the concrete walkway to the campground and additional paving would be located within the shoreline setback area (see Figure 8). A Shoreline Setback Variance would be required for activities in the shoreline setback area. The following discussion evaluates the consistency of the proposed Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement project with the applicable objectives and policies of Chapter 205A, HRS. The policies of Chapter 205A, HRS, the consistency of the proposed accessibility improvements with those policies, and the reasoning for the conclusion are set forth in the table below. Policy compliance is often a matter of interpretation. The County Council is the ultimate arbiter of public policy for the project, and their judgment regarding the project and a specific policy may be different from that set forth in this report. Therefore, the following policy evaluation should be viewed as preliminary, with the ultimate decision to be made by the appropriate appointed and elected officials. 38 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Miloh'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: Mule of Hawai'i, SMA Locater Online Map, 2019 Figure 7 Special Management Area Map i SHORELINE I FLOOD LIMITS - U EXIST IWS LEACH ��. FIELD TO REMAIN ZONE X EXIST COMFORT STATION TO I ZONE VE (EL 10) I 5a WIDE ACCESSIBLE CON RETE WALKWAY I I 40-FT - SHORELINE I SETBACK I, EXIST COMMUNITY PAVILION TO BE BE DEMOLISHED _ ,� DEMOLISHED 25' O EXIST COURTS 0 ] } �I' TO BE 0 1 I a RESURFACED ram-- tiii I NEW— t I�VND No P BOAT Tu R SYSTEM TO f E REPLACED sEW COMFORT STATION & POTABLE WATER SYSTEM — EXIST PAVEMENT TTO BE DEMOLISHED ,l I I I I � I I NEW COMMUNITY PAVILION II II BOAT TURNAROUND AREA i. LIMITS OF NEW (EL 7) I AC PAVEMENT - ", GRAPHIC SCAL 40 20 0 40 r Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 2022 Figure 8 Shoreline Setback Area Draft Environmental Assessment HRS Chapter 205A-2, Objective or Policy Consistency Discussion (1) Recreational resources; Yes The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important (A) Provide coastal recreational opportunities accessible to recreational facility for residents in the the public. area. The proposed project would have a Policy: beneficial impact to park and recreation resources since it would provide (B) Provide adequate, accessible, and diverse recreational accessibility improvements that would opportunities in the coastal zone management area by: broaden equitable public access to the (iii) Providing and managing adequate public access, beach park facilities. consistent with conservation of natural resources, to and along shorelines with recreational value; (iv) Providing an adequate supply of shoreline parks and other recreational facilities suitable for public recreation; (v) Ensuring public recreational uses of county, state, and federally owned or controlled shoreline lands and waters having recreational value consistent with public safety standards and conservation of natural resources; (2) Historic resources; Yes As set forth in Section 3.5, Histwic, (A) Protect, preserve, and, where desirable, restore those Archaeological, and Cultural Resources, an natural and manmade historic and prehistoric Archaeological Inventory Survey was resources in the coastal zone management area that completed for the project site. The are significant in Hawaiian and American history and archaeological inventory survey identified culture. three historic single feature sites. The Policy: mapping, written description, and photography of these sites adequately (A) Identify and analyze significant archaeological document them and no further work or resources; preservation is required. (B) Maximize information retention through preservation of remains and artifacts or salvage operations; and (C) Support state goals for protection, restoration, interpretation, and display of historic resources. (3) Scenic and open space resources; Yes As set forth in Section 3.8, Visual Resource, (A) Protect, preserve, and, where desirable, restore or the proposed project includes the improve the quality of coastal scenic and open space reconstruction of existing facilities in resources. addition to accessibility improvements. Policy: The proposed project would not significantly change the scenic and visual (B) Ensure that new developments are compatible with character of the surrounding area. their visual environment by designing and locating such developments to minimize the alteration of natural landforms and existing public views to and along the shoreline. (C) Preserve, maintain, and, where desirable, improve and restore shoreline open space and scenic resources. (4) Coastal ecosystems; Yes Adverse effects to water quality and the (A) Protect valuable coastal ecosystems, including reefs, coastal ecosystem would be minimized by from disruption and minimize adverse impacts on all site -specific BMPs (see Section 3.2 above). coastal ecosystems. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 41 Draft Environmental Assessment HRS Chapter 205A-2, Objective or Policy Consistency Discussion Policy: (A) Exercise an overall conservation ethic, and practice stewardship in the protection, use, and development of marine and coastal resources; (E) Promote water quantity and quality planning and management practices that reflect the tolerance of fresh water and marine ecosystems and maintain and enhance water quality through the development and implementation of point and nonpoint source water pollution control measures. (5) Economic uses; Yes The Miloli`i Beach Park is an important (A) Provide public or private facilities and improvements public beach park for residents of the area. important to the State's economy in suitable locations. As evaluated in this EA, adverse Policy: environmental impacts from implementation of the proposed action (B) Ensure that coastal dependent development such as would be minimized through project harbors and ports, and coastal related development design and mitigation measures contained such as visitor industry facilities and energy generating in this document. facilities, are located, designed, and constructed to minimize adverse social, visual, and environmental impacts in the coastal zone management area. (6) Coastal hazards; Yes As described in Section 3.3, Natural (A) Reduce hazard to life and property from tsunami, Ha.Zard , of this EA, the entire shoreline is storm waves, stream flooding, erosion, subsidence, subject to inundation due to high seas and and pollution. swells caused by hurricanes and distant Policy: storms and tsunami activity. The proposed improvements would be designed and (B) Control development in areas subject to storm wave, constructed in conformance with the tsunami, flood, erosion, hurricane, wind, subsidence, standards and requirements of the Hawaii and point and nonpoint source pollution hazards. plain County Code, Chapter 27, Flood (C) Ensure that developments comply with requirements Management, as applicable. In addition, the of the Federal Flood Insurance Program. project includes BMPs to be implemented during project construction to minimize erosion and potential impacts to water quality. (7) Managing development; Yes Early consultation with agencies, (A) Improve the development review process, organizations, and individuals was communication, and public participation in the conducted during preparation of the Draft management of coastal resources and hazards. EA for the proposed project. Additional public review will occur during the public comment period for the EA, and during the public hearing before the County of Hawaii Planning Commission during the SMA permit process. (8) Public participation; Yes See above. (A) Stimulate public awareness, education, and participation in coastal management. Policy: (A) Promote public involvement in coastal zone management processes. 42 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment HRS Chapter 205A-2, Objective or Policy Consistency Discussion (9) Beach protection; Yes The proposed project includes (A) Protect beaches for public use and recreation. reconstruction of park facilities and accessibility improvements at an existing beach park. (10) Marine resources; Yes As evaluated in this EA, adverse (A) Promote the protection, use, and development of environmental impacts from marine and coastal resources to assure their implementation of the proposed action sustainability. would be minimized through project Policy: design and mitigation measures contained in this document. (A) Ensure that the use and development of marine and coastal resources are ecologically and environmentally sound and economically beneficial. County Land Use Plans and Policies County of Hawaii General Plan The County of Hawaii General Plan (2005) is a long range, generalized planning policy document to guide development of the County. It serves as a basis for an implementation program to effectuate desired changes and improvements in the social, economic, and environmental atmosphere of the County. Topics addressed in the General Plan include goals and policies regarding population, land use, the environment, cultural resources, economic activity, housing and urban design, transportation, social infrastructure, and government. As set forth by the General Plan 2005: "Through the Zoning and Subdivision codes, and the Special Management Area and shoreline setback regulations, the County of Hawaii has the means to protect the island's natural and scenic beauty as an integral part of the living environment of the island." These land use regulations and how they apply to the proposed project are described throughout this section of the EA. A Draft General Plan 2040 was released in August 2019, with public review and comment period through October 31s`, 2019. This update of the General Plan incorporates emerging issues that were not addressed in the 2005 General Plan, such as climate change, healthy communities, integrated water resource management, renewable energy, food security, equitable housing and a place -based economy. Following completion of the public comment period, planners will incorporate comments and provide another public review period prior to moving the draft General Plan 2040 forward through the legislative process. The Windward and Leeward Planning Commission review hearings are expected to begin some time in spring of 2021, prior to final review and adoption by County Council. Since the County of Hawaii has not yet adopted this document, the 2005 General Plan is the current adopted policy of the County. The following discussion evaluates the consistency of the proposed project with applicable objectives and policies of the current General Plan. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 43 Draft Environmental Assessment Hawaii County 2005 General Plan, Goals and Polices Goal or Policy Consistency Discussion Floockng and Other Natural Ha.Zards 5.2 Goals Yes As described in Section 3.3, Natural (a) Protect human life. Ha.Zard , of this EA, the entire shoreline is (b) Prevent damage to man-made improvements. subject to inundation due to high seas and swells caused by hurricanes and distant (c) Control pollution. storms. The shoreline areas are also (d) Prevent damage from inundation. subject to tsunami activity. The proposed (e) Reduce surface water and sediment runoff improvements would be designed and (� Maximize soil and water conservation. constructed in conformance with the standards and requirements of the Hawaii 5.3 Policies plain County Code, Chapter 27, Flood (d) Any development within the Federal Emergency Management, as applicable. The proposed Management Agency designated flood plain must be in action includes site -specific BMPs to be compliance with Chapter 27. implemented during construction in order (g) Development -generated runoff shall be disposed of in to prevent any wastewater, sediment, soil, a manner acceptable to the Department of Public and debris resulting from the proposed Works and in compliance with all State and Federal construction from adversely impacting the laws. coastal ecosystem. Compliance with BMPs for construction would minimize impacts (q) Consider natural hazards in all land use planning and to water quality. Further, all earthwork permitting. grading operations would be conducted in compliance with dust and erosion control requirements of Hawaii County Code Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control. Histoaic Sites 6.2 Goals Yes As set forth in Section 3.5, Histwic, (a) Protect, restore, and enhance the sites, buildings, and Archaeological, and Cultural Resource, an objects of significant historical and cultural Archaeological Inventory Survey was importance to Hawaii. completed for the project site. The 6.3 Policies archaeological inventory survey identified three historic single feature sites. The (c) Require both public and private developers of land to mapping, written description, and provide historical and archaeological surveys and photography of these sites adequately cultural assessments, where appropriate, prior to the document them and no further work or clearing or development of land when there are preservation is required. indications that the land under consideration has historical significance. Natural Beauty 7.2 Goals Yes The Miloh'i area is identified as a "Natural (a) Protect, preserve and enhance the quality of areas Beauty Site" in the District of South Kona endowed with natural beauty, including the quality of (General Plan 2005 Table 7-12). The coastal scenic resources. proposed project would reconstruct h) Protect the views of areas endowed with natural existing recreation facilities and provide ADA accessible walkways and parking. beauty by carefully considering the effects of There would be no permanent changes to proposed construction during all land use reviews. the natural beauty or views of the area with project implementation. 44 Miloli i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment Hawaii County 2005 General Plan, Goals and Polices Goal or Policy Consistency Discussion Natural Resources and Shoreline 8.2 Goals Yes The proposed project includes (e) Protect and effectively manage Hawaii's open space, reconstruction of park facilities and watersheds, shoreline, and natural areas. accessibility improvements at an existing (t) Ensure that alterations to existing land forms, beach park. The proposed project vegetation, and construction of structures cause accessibility improvements would broaden minimum adverse effect to water resources, and equitable public access to the beach park scenic and recreational amenities and minimum facilities and shoreline. danger of floods, landslides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of an earthquake. 8.3 Policies (c) Maintain the shoreline for recreational, cultural, educational, and/or scientific uses in a manner that is protective of resources and is of the maximum benefit to the general public. (r) Ensure public access is provided to the shoreline, public trails and hunting areas, including free public parking where appropriate. Recreation 12.2 Goals Yes See above. (b) Maintain the natural beauty of recreation areas. 12.3 Policies (b) Improve existing public facilities for optimum usage. (h) Provide facilities and a broad recreational program for all age groups, with special considerations for the handicapped, the elderly, and young children. County of Hawaii Zoning Designation The County of Hawaii land use ordinance, or zoning code "awai`i County Code Chapter 25), regulates land use and overall future development on Hawaii Island within the framework of the Hawaii General Plan "awai`i County Code, Section 25-1-2(a)). The Miloll'i Beach Park site is zoned Open District. The purpose of the Open District is to buffer and preserve open land types of use, such as a beach park, which may be characterized by scenic beauty. Public parks are a permitted use in the Open District (Hawai`i County Code, Section 25-5-161 (a) (11)). No feature of the proposed accessibility improvements project would conflict with existing zoning. Kona Community Development Plan Community Development Plans (CDPs) translate broad goals, policies and standards from the Hawaii County General Plan into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around Hawaii Island. The CDPs serve as the forum for community input into establishing County policy at the regional level and coordinating the delivery of County services to the community. The CDPs direct physical development and public improvements and may contain detailed land use and zoning guide maps, plans for roadways, parks, other infrastructure and public facilities, planning for watersheds and natural resources, and any other land use matters relating to the planning area (Hawai`i County Planning Department 2019). The Kona CDP covers the Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 45 Draft Environmental Assessment geographic districts of North Kona, reaching nearly to Waikoloa Village, and South Kona, including the Community of Miloli`i. The Kona CDP sets forth a standard of excellence in design, operation, and maintenance, and specifically prioritizes upgrading and maintenance of Miloli`i Beach Park: Policy PUB-7.2: Excellence in Maintenance. If the community and responsible public workers cannot stand next to the public facility with pride, then that is a call to action for both the community and the responsible public agency. Action PUB-7.2c: Provide for upgrading and maintenance to the public facilities in critical need of attention: ii. Maintain parks and public facilities in remote areas, such as Miloli`i. The proposed project would replace the existing pavilion to meet permitting standards and provide accessibility improvements to the park, among other improvements. These upgrades are essential to meet ADA requirements and provide equitable access to the park amenities. 46 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 4 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED ACTION This chapter considers alternatives to the proposed action, including the No Action Alternative. 4.1 PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES No Action Alternative The No Action Alternative identifies the expected environmental impacts in the future if existing conditions were left as is with no action taken by the approving agency. Under the No Action Alternative, the proposed accessibility improvements would not be constructed and existing park features would not be reconstructed. As a result, the present conditions within the project area would predominantly continue into the future, with some members of the community experiencing limited or difficult access to park facilities. Also, the basketball court and pavilion would remain in disrepair and would not meet County permit requirements. This alternative would not meet any of the identified project objectives. Preferred Alternative 1: Proposed Action Under this alternative, the restoration improvements described in Section 2.2 would be implemented as the Proposed Project. The beneficial impacts of the proposed project include the increased accessibility to the park offered by improved parking lot including ADA spaces, connecting ADA accessible walks and ramps to park facilities for greater accibility from feature to feature, improvement and replacement of existing facilities to meet ADA guidelines and County permit requirements, and the addition of a new children's play apparatus. Alternative 2: Alternate Comfort Station Location Alternative 2 would include a new comfort station and new potable water system sited closer to the camp sites (see Figure 9). The new comfort station location would require the installation of new septic tank(s) and associated sewer piping, though the existing leach field would be reused. The septic tank and sewer piping would be designed in accordance with the State Department of Health requirements. Under the proposed Alternative 2, the new potable water system and replacement pavilion would be located within the Shoreline Setback Area, and the pavilion would remain in the flood zone. This alternative was eliminated based on community feedback that the comfort station location closer to the campsites is not desired, and the original location is preferred. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmement 47 POND \� 10-FT WIDE ACCESSIBLE CONCRETE WALKWAY & ° DRIVEABLE BEACH ACCESS NEW POTABLE WATER SYSTEM ° ° ° ° ° NEW SEPTIC TANK AND NEW COMFORT SEWERLINE TO EXIST STATION ° LEACH FIELD o ° EXIST IWS LEACH FIELD TO REMAIN 2 O/ o line d 1 Ln aw' ma . S::. .. � EXIST COURTS TO BE XRECONSTRUCTED _06 __ 06 build' g , 84' X 50' I. I Lq bolding _j O') Now Ane > CD W O d9 o LIMI OF NE 24' AC PA EMENT ° 2TOOTAB E WATER ,SYSTEM --TO °-- REPLACED EXIST 0MFORT STATION B€ [DEMOLISHED building G RAP H I C 40 20 EXIST PAVEMENT TO BE DEMOLISHED °°'I°`ng s EXIST COMMUNITY PAVILION TO BE DEMOLISHED & REPLACED •7 r o Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement SOURCE: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 2019 Figure 9 Alternative 2 Conceptual Site Plan 5 FINDINGS AND DETERMINATION As set forth in HAR, Section 11-200.1-13, in considering the significance of potential environmental effects, an agency must "consider every phase of a proposed action, the expected impacts, and the proposed mitigation measures." The proposed action is not expected to have a significant effect on the environment. The recommended preliminary determination for the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement is a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). The findings supporting this determination are discussed below. (1) Does the project irrevocably commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource? The effects of multiple tsunamis and the historic impacts to the property by the construction and use of the school suggests that no pre -contact archaeological sites or features are likely to be encountered. While there is low probability of encountering archaeological sites in this area, in the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, are identified during the construction activities, all work would cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find would be protected from additional disturbance, and the State Historic Preservation Division would be contacted immediately. The proposed project is not anticipated to involve an irrevocable commitment, or loss and destruction of any natural or cultural resource. (2) Does the project curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment? The proposed improvements would not curtail the range of beneficial uses at the project site. The project would increase the range of beneficial uses of the environment by improving existing beach park facilities and accessibility to these recreational resources. With implementation of accessibility improvements, recreational access for disabled visitors to the park would be improved. (3) Does the project conflict with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by the law? The proposed project is consistent with the environmental policies and long-term environmental goals established in HRS, Chapter 344. The guiding policies as set forth in HRS, Chapter 344-3, include: (1) Conserve the natural resources, so that land, water, mineral, visual, air and other natural resources are protected by controlling pollution, by preserving or augmenting natural resources, and by safeguarding the State's unique natural environmental characteristics in a manner which will foster and promote the general welfare, create and maintain conditions under which humanity and nature can exist in productive harmony, and fulfill the social, economic, and other requirements of the people of Hawaii. (2) Enhance the quality of life by: (A) Setting population limits so that the interaction between the natural and artificial environments and the population is mutually beneficial; (B) Creating opportunities for the residents of Hawaii to improve their quality of life through diverse economic activities which are stable and in balance with the physical and social environments; Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmement 49 Draft Environmental Assessment (C) Establishing communities which provide a sense of identity, wise use of land, efficient transportation, and aesthetic and social satisfaction in harmony with the natural environment which is uniquely Hawaiian; and (D) Establishing a commitment on the part of each person to protect and enhance Hawaii's environment and reduce the drain on nonrenewable resources. The proposed project would both conserve and enhance the natural resources of the park, and enhance the recreational experience for both visitors and the local populace. (4) Does the project have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and State? The proposed action would have a short-term positive effect on the economic welfare of the island resulting from hiring construction workers. This project is not expected to significantly affect traditional native Hawaiian cultural practices or other traditional cultural practices occurring in the surrounding area. The proposed action would not have a substantial long-term effect on the economic and social welfare of the community or the state. The proposed project is in accordance with land use plans and regulations as set forth in Section 3.12, Conformance with State and County plans, Policies, and Land Use Controls. (5) Does the project have a substantial adverse effect on public health? The project would not substantially affect public health as discussed in various sections of this document. Construction activities may temporarily increase fugitive dust and noise levels in the project vicinity. Short-term construction -related effects would be minimized by complying with pertinent State or City regulations and conditions of permits required. Further, these impacts would cease upon completion of construction. The proposed improvements would repair facilities in a current state of disrepair, and therefore protect the health and safety of the public. No long-term negative impact on public health is anticipated with implementation of the proposed action. (6) Does the project involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities? The proposed action would not generate population or create secondary demands and impacts on public facilities and services. The project would not alter the present use of the park. (7) Does the project involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality? There would be no long-term, adverse environmental impacts associated with the proposed action. Construction activities may temporarily increase dust and noise in the project vicinity. However, these impacts would cease upon completion of construction. The proposed project will also include site -specific BMPs to minimize erosion and sedimentation effects to water quality. Additional mitigation measures included in Chapter 3 would minimize potential construction -related impacts. 50 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Draft Environmental Assessment (8) May the project be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involve a commitment for larger actions? The proposed Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement project is limited to the existing park. In a regional context, the project would not have cumulatively significant impacts. (9) Does the project have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, threatened, or endangered species, or its habitat? With implementation of mitigation and BMPs described in Section 2.2 of this document, no substantial adverse effects would occur to rare, threatened, or endangered species, or their habitats. (10) Does the project have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels? Construction activities would have a short-term effect on air quality, water quality, and ambient noise levels. Mitigation included in Chapter 3 would minimize these potential impacts. Construction activities would also be subject to applicable State and City regulations and permit conditions. No additional long-term impacts would occur. (11) Does the project have a substantial adverse effect on or be likely to suffer damage by being located in an environmentally sensitive area such as a flood plain, tsunami zone, sea level rise exposure area, beach, erosion -prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water, or coastal waters? Construction of the proposed park accessibility improvement project would not result in increased flooding or hazards from flooding in surrounding areas. The proposed pavilion location would be shifted south of the existing location and away from the shoreline. The new pavilion would be relocated outside of Flood Zone VE, a coastal flood zone. The proposed improvements would be designed and constructed in conformance with the standards and requirements of the Hawaii County Code, Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, as applicable. (12) Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and viewplanes, during day or night, identified in county or state plans or studies? Since the proposed project consists of accessibility improvements and replacement of existing uses at the Miloli`i Beach Park, the proposed project would not significantly change the scenic and visual character of the surrounding area. The proposed improvements would not obstruct views from any recognized view corridor or scenic roadway. (13) Would the project require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases? There would be energy consumption associated with construction of the proposed project. The amount of energy that would be consumed with project implementation is not considered substantial. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 51 Draft Environmental Assessment This page intentionally left blank. 52 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 6 INDIVIDUALS, COMMUNITY GROUPS, AND AGENCIES CONSULTED 6.1 EARLY CONSULTATION Early consultation was conducted from July 2019 to December 2019, prior to preparation of the Draft EA for the proposed project. This is part of the scoping process for the Draft EA, and is intended to identify environmental issues and concerns to be addressed in the Draft EA. The following agencies, organizations, and individuals were sent a preliminary project description for comments or questions. Those that provided written comments (either by hard copy or electronically) are highlighted in italics. Copies of the written comments are included in Appendix A. FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Army Corps of Engineers Department of the Navy Environmental Protection Agency U.S. National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration, National Marine Fisheries Service STATE AGENCIES Department of Health, Environmental Health Administration Department of Transportation Department of Accounting and General Services Office of Planning University of Hawaii Environmental Center University of Hawaii Water Resources Research Center Office of Hawaiian Affairs Department of Hawaiian Home Lands Department of Land and Natural Resources Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division COUNTY OF HAWAPI Department of Environmental Management Planning Department Department of Public Vorks Department of Vater Supply ELECTED OFFICIALS County Council Representative — District 6 COMMUNITY Pa`a Pono Miloli`i Neighboring land owners Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 53 Draft Environmental Assessment 6.2 MILOLI`I COMMUNITY MEETINGS The Department of Parks and Recreation also scheduled two community meetings at the park to better understand the needs and concerns regarding the proposed improvements. The meeting were held on October 18, 2019, and November 3, 2019 at the Halau pavilion. Approximately 9 community members and 32 community members attended the meetings on October 18, 2019 and November 3, 2019, respectively, in addition to Department of Parks and Recreation staff. Concerns and questions highlighted in the early consultation meeting included (though all topics discussed may not be listed): • Some commentors wanted more parking, some wanted less • Turn around area for truck/boat trailer, water truck, and school bus. • Hibachi/Grill pits • Area/security lighting, pole mounted, solar powered. • Improvements to the comfort station — may need larger water tank capacity for shower • Pavilion/Halau — concerns with existing solar/PV system • Retain community events • Access during construction • Septic system and water quality • Increase in tourist visitors? • Cultural and historical resources being protected? The majority sentiment regarding park improvements is to retain the park amenities and features that currently exist while minimizing the amount of changes and improvements to the park as possible. Concerns identified in the community meetings were considered during the site design process and resulted in some modifications to project plans. Parks and Recreation representatives also attended a meeting with the Planning Department on November 7, 2019 regarding permitting and approval requirements for the proposed project. An additional community meeting was held at the park on May 16, 2021, to follow-up on community concerns previously identified. Approximately 15-20 community members were in attendance. Following the Department of Parks and recreation staff presentation of project intent, the community discussion identified the following issues (though all topics discussed may not be listed): • Halau Pavilion has sentimental value since its built by the community. • Outdoor shower? After discussion it was determined that a shower is not needed due to limited water supply, run-off into ocean, possible homeless and squatters. • Existing PV system is not working. • Try to save as much of existing ironwood trees as possible, most trees are from original school site and trees also provide shade. • Save existing pebble gravel at Halau and surrounding area, reuse/relocate. • Place no parking sign(s) at proposed boat turn around area. • Place no parking sign(s) at gate to residence (Chang's). • Salvage existing Halau building materials for community use. • During construction, local fishing community still needs access to boat turn around. If entire park facility will need to be closed, village community will need advance notice. 54 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement • New Halau Pavilion should have barricades to keep cars from parking under roof, short wall or similar. During an informal site visit to the park on June 21, 2022, Department of Parks and Recreation staff discussed additional details with community members regarding the PV system requirements, a service window at the pavilion, and insulation in the pavilion storage area. Fire protection requirements were also discussed and will be incorporated into project design. 6.3 COMMENTS AND RESPONSES ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Notification of the availability of the Draft EA was published in the August 8, 2020 The Enrironmental Notice. Due to concerns regarding adequate opportunities for public participation during COVID-19, the comment period for the project was extended, and notice of availability of the Draft EA was published in the subsequent issues of The Enrironmental Notice, including the September 8, 2020 issue, and the October 8, 2020 issue. During the 90-day public comment period ending November 9, 2020, agencies, organizations, and individuals were provided the opportunity to comment on the proposed project. Copies of the Draft EA were distributed to the following parties for review and comment, or notification of its availability was provided. Those that provided written comments (either by hard copy or electronically) are highlighted in italics. The comment letters are included in Appendix A of this document. FEDERAL AGENCIES U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department of Army Corps of Engineers STATE AGENCIES Department of Health, Envimnmental Health Administration Office of Planning Department of Land and Natural Resources Department of Land and Natural Resources - Historic Preservation Division COUNTY OF KAUA`I Department of Planning Transportation Agency ELECTED OFFICIALS County Council Representative COMMUNITY Propea y oxners across giver and near crossing Interested Parties Waimea Public Library The Garden Island Newspaper These comments are included in Appendix A and the Table: Summary Comments and Responses in Appendix A. Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmvement 55 Draft Environmental Assessment 6.4 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PREPARATION This Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) was prepared for the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation by Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. and Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. The following consultants were involved in the preparation of this document: William F. Bow, Environmental Director, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Emi Tanitomi, P.E., Project Manager, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Robert D. Klousner, President, Principal in Charge, Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. Raadha M. B. Jacobstein, Professional Planner, Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. Mary Wilson, Editor, Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. Dale Nutley, Graphic Artist, Environmental Planning Partners, Inc. 56 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement 7 REFERENCES CAB. See Hawaii, State of, Department of Health, Clean Air Branch. DAR. See Hawaii, State of, Division of Aquatic Resources. DBEDT. See Hawaii, State of, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism. DLNR. See Department of Land and Natural Resources. DOH. See Hawaii, State of, Department of Health. DOH CWB. See Hawaii, State of, Department of Health, Clean Water Branch. Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2019. Earthquake Hazard Maps. Last updated 01/14/2019. Accessed on July 31, 2019 at <https://www.fema.gov/earthquake/earthquake- hazard-maps> Federal Emergency Management Agency, 2017. Flood Insurance Rate Map. Map Number 1551661691F. Map Revised September 29, 2017. FEMA. See Federal Emergency Management Agency. Farber & Associates, 2012. Final Environmental Assessment, Miloli`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center, Miloli'i, Ho'opuloa, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Fornander, A. 1885. An Account of the Polynesian Race, its Origins and Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Polynesian People to the Times of Kamehameha L Vol. IL Trubner, London. Giambelluca, T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M. Delparte, 2013. Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawaii. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. Accessed on July 31, 2019 at < http://rainfall.geography.hawaii.edu/interactivemap.html > Haun & Associates, 2022. Final Archaeological Inventory Survey: TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001. Miloli`i Ahupua`a, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Prepared by: Alan E. Haun, Ph.D. and Dave Henry, B.S. Prepared for: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation. August 2022. Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission. 2017. Hawaii Sea 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, under the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources Contract No: 64064. Hawaii National Flood Insurance Program (HNFIP), 2019. Flood Hazard Assessment Tool. Accessed on July 31, 2019 at <http://gis.hawalinfip.org/FHAT/> Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmewent 57 References Hawaii, County of, Planning Department, 2019. Planning Department Website information. Accessed on September 4, 2019 at < http://www.hiplanningdept.com> Hawaii, County of, Planning Department, 2016. Hawaii County Code. 1983 (2016 Edition, as Amended). Accessed on September 4, 2019 at < http://www.hawaiicounty.gov/lb- countycode > Hawaii, County of, 2008. Mapping Kona's Future: Kona Community Development Plan. September 2008 (As Amended). Accessed on April 27, 2020 at < https://www.hawaiicountycdp.info/north-and-south-kona-cdp/kona-cdp-document > Hawaii, County of, 2005. County of Hawaii General Plan. February 2005 (as amended). Accessed on August 5, 2019 at < http://www.hiplanningdept.com/general-plan/2005-plan/> Hawaii, State of, Department of Business, Economic Development & Tourism, 2019. Census. Accessed on August 5, 2019 at < http://census.hawaii.gov> Hawaii, State of, Department of Health, Clean Air Branch (CAB), 2020. State of Hawaii Annual Summary 2020 Air Quality Data. December 2021. Accessed on August 5, 2022 at <http://health.hawaii.gov/cab/> Hawaii, State of, Department of Health, 2014. Water Quality Standards Map of the Island of Hawaii. June 2014. Accessed on July 30, 2019 at <http://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/site- map/clean-water-branch-home-page/water-quality-standards /> Hawaii, State of, Department of Health (DOH), Clean Water Branch (CWB), 2018. 2018 State of Hawaii Water Quality Monitoring and Assessment Report. July 11, 2018. Accessed on July 30, 2019 at < http://health.hawaii.gov/cwb/clean-water-branch-home-page/integrated- report-and-total-maximum-daily-loads/ > Hawaii, State of, Commission on Water Resource Management, 2019. Hawaii Water Plan. Water Resource Protection Plan. 2019 Update. Accessed on July 30, 2019 at: < http://files.hawaii.gov/Department of Parks and Recreation / cwrm/planning/wrpp2019up date / WRPP_DRAFT_ALL_201907.p df> Hawaii, State of, Department of Planning, 2013. Stormwater Impact Assessments: Connecting primary, secondary and cumulative impacts to Hawaii's Environmental Review process. May 2013. Accessed on September 4, 2019 at: < http://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/czm/initiative/stomwater_imapct/final_stormwater_imp act —assessments Lyuidance.pdf > Hawaii, State of, Department of Planning, Department of Land and Natural Resources, 2012. State of Hawaii Conservation Subzone. November 2012. Accessed on September 2, 2019 at: < https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/occl/subzone-maps/ > Hawaii, State of, Office of Planning (OP), 1977. Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawaii (ALISH). State Department of Agriculture, 1977. Map accessed on July 29, 2019 at: <http://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/various-maps/ > 58 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement References Hawaii, State of, Office of Planning (OP), 2019. Special Management Area. Map accessed on September 2, 2019 at: <http://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/various-maps/ > HNFIP. See Hawaii National Flood Insurance Program. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), 2013. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Sczence Basis. Contribution of 1Ylorking Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Stocker, T.F., D. Qin, G.-K. Plattner, M. Tignor, S.K. Alen, J. Boschung, A. Nauels, Y. Xia, V. Bex and P.M. Midgley (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom and New York, NY, USA, 1535 pp. Accessed on July 31, 2019 at < http://www.lpcc.ch/report/ar5/wgI/> IPCC, 2022. Climate Change 2022. Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability. Contribution of Working Group II to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [H.-O. Portner, D.C. Roberts, M. Tignor, E.S. Poloczanska, K. Mintenbeck, A. Alegria, M. Craig, S. Langsdorf, S. Loschke, V. Moller, A. Okem, B. Rama (eds.)]. Cambridge University Press. In Press. Accessed on March 23, 2022 at: < https://Www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg2/> Maly, K. and O. Maly 2003. He Wahl Mo`olelo No Na Lawai`a Ma Kapalilua, Kona Hema, Hawaii: A Collection of Historical Accounts and Oral History Interviews with Elder Kama`aina Fisher -people from the Kapalilua Region of South Kona, Island of Hawaii. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, HI. NOAA. See United States National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration. NPS. See National Park Service. NRCS. See U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC), 1997. Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts. Accessed on January 31, 2022 at: <http://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/OEQC_Guidance/ 1997-Cultural-Impacts-Guldance.pdf> Pa`a Pono Miloli`i, 2017. Accessed on July 30, 2019 at: <http://paaponomilolli.org> United States, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), 2020. State of the Climate: Global Climate Report for Annual 2019. Published online January 2020. Accessed on February 18, 2020 at: < https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/sotc/global/201913> U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service, 2018. Custom Sol] Resource Report for Island of Hawaii Area, Hawaii. Version 11, September 11, 2018. Accessed on July 29, 2019 at <http://websollsurvey.nres.usda.gov/app/WebSoilSurvey.aspx> U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), 2017. Volcano Hazards Program. Mauna Loa. Page modified 11/02/2017. Accessed on July 29, 2019 at: <https://volcanoes.usgs.gov/volcanoes/mauna—loa/> Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Impmement 59 References USGS 2012. Mauna LoaHistory, Hazards, and Risk of Living With the World's Largest Volcano. Accessed on July 29, 2019 at: <https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3104/fs2012-3104.pdf> USGS undated. Hawaii Technical Hazard Maps. Accessed on July 31, 2019 at: <https://pubs.usgs.gov/imap/12761 /sections/6_Hawaii.pdf> USFWS 2019. National Wetlands Inventory, Surface Waters and Wetlands Mapper. Accessed on July 30, 2019 at: <https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/Mapper.html> University of Hawaii at Manoa, Sea Grant College Program, 2014. Climate Change Impacts in Hawaii - A summary of climate change and its impacts to Hawai`i's ecosystems and communities. June 2014. U.S. Climate Data 2019. Accessed on August 5, 2019 at: <usclimatedata.com> 60 Miloli `i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement APPENDIX A CONSULTATION AND COMMENT LETTERS APPENDIX A EARLY CONSULTATION COMMENT LETTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY U.S. ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER, HONOLULU DISTRICT ' FORT SHAFTER, HAWAII 96858-5440 J July 31, 2019 SUBJECT: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Regulatory Program Information for Miloli'i Beach Park Improvement, South Kona, Island of Hawai'i; Corps Reference Number: POH-2019-00149 Mr. William Bow Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 1953 South Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Dear Mr. Bow: The Honolulu District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps), Regulatory Office is in receipt of the County of Hawai'i, Department of Parks and Recreation's proposal to improve Miloli'i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act. The project is located in the coastal village of Miloli'i in the South Kona District on the Island of Hawai'i. You submitted a description of the preliminary project design and requested comments regarding permitting requirements. The Corps reference number for this project is POH-2019-00149; please include it in any future correspondence regarding this project. We have reviewed your submittal pursuant to our authorities under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1344; "Section 404") and Section 10 of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 (33 U.S.C. 403; "Section 10"). Section 404 requires Department of the Army (DA) authorization for the discharge (placement) of dredged and/or fill material into waters of the U.S., including marine waters, streams, drainages, and wetlands. Under Section 404, our line of jurisdiction is the high tide line. Section 10 requires DA authorization for the placement of structures in, under or over navigable waters of the U.S. and/or other work affecting the course, location, condition or capacity of such waters. Under Section 10, our line of jurisdiction is the mean high water mark. Based on the preliminary project description and associated figures, it is unclear whether the project would require a DA permit. It appears that a majority, if not all, of the work will occur in uplands, landward of our line of jurisdiction. There is a new 10- foot wide concrete walkway and vehicular beach access road proposed. If this will extend into the Pacific Ocean, or if work associated with it will occur within the water, then a DA permit will be required. Please be aware that before the Corps can issue a permit, we need to ensure your project is compliant with the following federal laws. WA 1. Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act. 2. Magnuson -Stevens Fishery Conservation and Management Act, Essential Fish Habitat. 3. Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act. 4. Coastal Zone Management Act, Federal Consistency. 5. Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. At the design stage, we strongly encourage project proponents to avoid all impacts to waters of the U.S. If you are not working within a water of the U.S., a DA permit from the Corps is not required. If you cannot avoid work in waters of the U.S., we ask that you minimize impacts to the greatest extent feasible. If you cannot design the project to avoid work in waters of the U.S. or if you do not know if the proposed work is in waters of the U.S., we recommend you submit a request for a jurisdictional determination on the project site. Information pertaining to our permitting program and the link to the Corps' jurisdictional determination request form can be found at: https-//www.poh.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Permits.aspx Thank you for your coordination with the Honolulu District Regulatory Program. If you have any questions regarding the permitting process or our regulatory program please contact me at Frank. J.Winter(a)-usace.army. mil or (808) 835-4107. Sincerely, Frank Winter Project Manager, Regulatory Branch = �............ ..... r .'.ta. It s •µ�«tiky� . OFF ICV OF PLAr'VIwIII C!, V IC.. 2'3'11 �uutfi 19 e t },vial Stre,F t, Gth Fleior, Boric}II lu r1 Ivw Iii r,Gfi13 I£d 6 t tvl,„i!in}! AIIcII,,.: ;. I',,_l. Iscrx 1:11,i3, FI„rur till, f l w.... I 'I141i:4 ,'lttI!"IIs[ 1). ,i111) Mr. William Bow Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 1953 South 13eretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hl 96826 Dear Mr. Bow:. AUG 13 �Orq DAVID Y. IGE GOVERNOR MARY ALICE EVANS DIRECTOR OFFICE OF PLANNING Tal©phone: (808) 587.2846 Fax. (808) 587.2824 Web, httpcl/plenning,hawaii.govl D"I'S201908080842NA Subject: Miliflii 11vach P,;irk Accc-s4hIlily Ilrlprovellicr,l I'nric•ct and F;ru'1"v ['r,lrmltmlon, Miluiii, til;lilll I'.,}1:;1, I ltl`,1�lii; 1 c1,X N111a l"ey: (y) 8-�;-t104: 001 1 Ill' 11I1c'C' Uf I,L, liilll ', ((1I't ?a11'�. lilt 111c pr;,p,Isc'cl fy;il,�lii I?,,,;I,'I� ��,,�r',�•._ il�ilil'�: IIIIhI� �crl�w.I�II I'Injt•r�!, ti;�llll� I�;�,ll•�. i Cetl]'lllill,' wYO1.l l'1111,, toii,,Iihah(1111`C"illll^,l. 111[' of PnII';'; 1111d tiCi.t'C;111„Ir. Cm1111Y r!I I1:m III. 171iTO,)"s (,) Illipl'; vc Mill}III kc;lch Piw,, huilcI" �"11,.1 arlll'11kwl 1c1 i:;unipiy with ;llnrlic,tn ; with Disabilities Act (ADD) guideline.,,. '1 a I'ollt.wiltt:, fictions arc propclscd by the sul:lject projecU • Demolish the c, ir;lin olwk)rl_ st❑11011, NMI t_I111-,lrui:1 ;1 iicw c11r11Ii_,rt station • Denlolisll the e.sistiut', p,101i1111, .u1;I C011 1r-1U1 a I!uw 11;lvilicltl • Pl•()VILIC rc,,y' Itirlr't11I71e W, IWI* r;lc,r;I c :Ill l plllnp s*i[imi fir new comfort station lnipl'o%c Ill Ill." I eft ,iL'1 Cti:,lIIIC • 1111140 t' .t;tll:wr,_y:,; ftI he ;twt _-;,,II,[,, • Rl.'G't1I1titmci l,a ltiC(1,: II :md v,d1v%d),d1 cc,ur•1s For use of state I,wds,lnd ', ttc° ftlrl(k 11t1d use ol'conservation district lands, all �111i1,11:119:�ulll _r-I (I A) k,ill I,t_, l,r Ila`,raii NCV1,Cd' IMILIIU" (1111-5)Olal)tcl I ll ' 11: if l c [.,::I Ci1;:f 1!!1' ; �1:1111(' 1+:11 i,l :;I( I,:. y1_',Cd hcC [L:11 11;Ir1 111111f'll II}LI'1", C;.111nated tl i ! .. I Illi Ii,sii. 'I he I f (" I I,iII II, t •u's ru, t,,1 i1; . ue 17h,15C. The 01) has reviewed your EA consultation request and has the following comments to offer: 1, Tha I1;1 vllii I;II: I'Lilltlill), ;V1, I1I? [ il:ilfl 'r'.'f,_ pr,vic.lc, "Ik% ;, IIl1Ic'cllti': . policies, and 11'101'llY ,_!t I IL'lllil' h11' �,r[,`,l( 1. tlC1'L'l,Illtlll'111, ;111,1 rite i111ofCatloll i,I rC.s [)kUCCS (IIIt,11t',h,11.11 111C `;I,I(l, ill ;IICl1; of SI;IIL' IIilCrCA. 'I Ile I ::h,Ill Id diSCIISS II[L' f'i 1ilp7 [111?I 11v 1)1' (Ile fua,lsnr;ccl ac'Iit,11 ,,witll 111C ;Ipphc'.lhlr rlh C01vl 4 ,1111.1 polici• , siIld pri,+rite ,!mdclines lislt,.kl ill 1110('hapicl %Vilhmll liow A I i,,-, L i,; t 1), 2019 . ;PI It, .-, 2. The Hawaii Cko.tiI;tl lonv. M,,mwvmvW (CZM) 11IRS Chiplci-205A, recIniresall Stillc• :111d cilulll.Y. Alhd I lk.- I A 'dIOLdd /Ni i,17'11,ltIv(:saj1d MIPP.11011L 161CCII�U�l AIR[ uld 1�1)cli 1:1.1 PL11'h, p;ii ii,.,i[ ;:Iwn, bc,i,,h iwql IILII Ilk- 3. The pi -()- j cc t ti 11,, is I o c ,I t c (I w i t h i I c , 1) (.- I, i t I I ma n ti v e I -n ke n I. a re, M A) as, d C I --,, I I . I I C L 1 1) flic mild". 1-1 1 Im.v:111, tilldcl I 11;1111c11'0l /\ I Ilk-. ( W IL- 1.'A NI)LA IfiC;d 1.r' L iL,CtjsL, 11IL: 0)111111 I'LIHLT With 1I C IC,IIIii HIL't&, k lf'.SNIA wa, h 111c I km;[Ili I )rj'Im-It)wr[ 161. the PWklj)U.Xd -wku,]Cvt. 4. I tR 11w C(,�I,A.11 Crosion. UlUl ITA IIIUICd'W.-; till'1J.',1k 111'1111,111d Ilikill, 1 )11 111,11 dw cIibC A jCj, jq) I lcct [ 1 11 S L,V( W :I -III A.A.1w:11 I'm P1)01' _'f) I ;JA_t'j)",Cd bN' OW• I IXA111' CIIIII,AL_- 'Ilmlcc N111 1;, !A lIIII:YA; 11. l 1IC I 1,W.';II I S( il I UN L I IN' JSC VIC%%Or at ':;A I I I 11.11 C;ti 1;! 1,1.111 11 1 Il I cl-11:11t I &I it I I W-, I, I rise exP)1.I11:, I.. ['"., I IIl;II:! I hV,:MkIII JSI:Illd5 HICII.K11111,. ):Om. lvhich IS to occul M ([I,. mid 1f1 11;111 '1 (111,' ,' I ';l 1, 'Iltffl V. 11 IlkI A 'flIMIld omsidel, 11-1 11111! '. I I Ik Q I i I I "; I I including IUL,'[ (I o I I - I Ic I,I, I I I [ Ic -C I'd tr t 110. 1)01 C1 I I J:! I I 11, 1 1 ,Jl- I S 0 1 SL;jj I(L., I J'I.Se oil the Pj',jj il 11110i I. I] I, W Ild hEICII 1( 11 5. 01`n , I ' i; I c I, ( en t I I 1,,k I N,1 1I); I i''a.. -i h..;.P., C. I Vq �_ � i "'i i, I." " h I % ,. 1, L5 :1 11-, 1 J'k ", % '� I I. I 't' ijllcl,j �11 IIH:1 :;[L)l 11 %V,00 II[)AL'I 1111 1 iv% .i 11 , "!I\ 11 W11,C)II'l IC", k".1 allc "Illdil l. Al ;1:, I mwl: I IIIlj%"IL+ Ill I c I.I.wilill I)l lr;k- 40 -r,ljk, k I I lic 01, 1 tK, 1:1A ut)lmidul 1, 1 :wjpi Ii 111, '11''1 1 11;1'm -i I I'l 1, 1; I I I L I It' I I I I I C I '.!fC- i[)CCII C Ill:! 1, Ill I W;I'Al: 11 w,;Ik, Ilk, P 11. ill 1;1' '111 Ila, j )I k 'J)i O-Cd I I , 1 111, IIII k1l C,111 :J!'j I'L L I I." ill 1.1t llcl:, rd the Coastal ccosystcln, This , I L I : 11 I- I I I P, <t~- ill 1,1111C ;It h1([):/;'1-I CS.1 LkV.11 m '11cl I Ct I I' N;1111 111tV N I I V CL I CS I 1,)11', rc 11Itiint! this comment letter, please contact Shichao Li of our office at. k8081) .597-294 1 . Sincerely, Mary A I ice Evans Director DAVIDY.IGE 613VF FIN01I OF HAWAII 5 x STATE OF HAWAII. �' wH D PAR"!'WNT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES 1,ANU DIVISION POSTOFFIM BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 968WJ August 2, 2019 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Attn: Mr. William Bow 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Dear Mr. Bow: SUZANNF D. CASE CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF I.A ND A ND NA7'UR.AI. RESOURCE S, COMMISSION ON WA9'RR RESOURCE MANAGEMENT via email: wbow@bowengineering.com SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project locate at Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK. (3) 8-9-004:001 on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation 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) Division of Boating & Ocean Recreation, (b) Engineering Division and (c) Land Division — Hawaii District 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 �YTsuji Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files K"O I kq SUZANNE D. CASH OAWIS]Y.IGE .•'""""..,k Via" •�oep ` 130ARDOF1,ANDANDNATURA[.1tRSoLias CI1AIRPRRSON [3[7 VFRN4]R l7F HhWAII f COM NTtSS[ON ON WAT61t RESOURCE MANAGEMENT �Lgnd anrd � f s'rATE O)I4 11AWAH rrnarur+ ° D PARTNIFNI' Me LAND AND 1NAT[TRAr, RESOURCES LAND DIVISION 110SI (11 FIC1: BOX 021 _ 110NUI1A. LLI. HAWAR 96809 ,July 12, 2019 r.- a UD MEMORANDUM C TO: DLNR Agencies: r X Div. of Aquatic Resources X 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 X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator J SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloh'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project LOCATION: Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 APPLICANT: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 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 darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii_ oc�v. Thank you. 0, } We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. ( } Comments ire at the 1 Signed: r Print Name: y Date:' Attachments cc: Central Files DAVOY.11 ;i LrLIVELI °t;ioao;ro: CiOYSAWMOPNAWAII `ANO DIVISION (M(115 JUL 24 AM 11: 5S �s (11 I ,I - 5'I'A't'I{f)l+' ll�i1�VAI1 Of Ow �' �I `i�It` ifiL 1? �'ARi7'MENT OF LAND AN1) NA'I'IJRA,I. RFSOtI]WFS , TM E QF 1 'YCA if LAND UIVItiION 71\7Q) FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION : APPLICANT: HONOLULU, HANV II 96809 July 12, 2019 MEMORANDUM DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources X 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 X Historic Preservation 51MANN3 M CASE UJAIRPKUSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATUR.IL AFSAURCCS COMMISSION ON WATER RR90URCR MANAGEMENT Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above- rote renced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 20M If no response is received by this date, we will assurne 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.pgv. Thank you. ( } We have no objections. ( } We have no comments. Comments are attached. Signed: Print Name: Gamy �-Gh' ng, Chief Engineer Date: Attachments cc: Central Files DEPAIl 'I',Mit ,N'[' ()I�' I.ANI) .,\Nl) NA I URAL RESOUItCiJS ENCINEFRING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tstt.ji 110': Scopint, ,111d Flarl,y Consultation fur- the Pr( jlwc ctl 1VIiloh'i lic,tch Park Accr.ssiltility Impr(trement Prn.jecl J'Nlk(s): (i) 8-4-004:001 Location: I hoopulmi-MilolPi, South Iona. I.4land of Hawaii Applicant: Bow Enoineerirtg & Devclopmcnt, Inc, on behalf of the County of llao+'aii, I)eportmcnt of Parks .Irld Recr•c'atioll ( QVI [1IF N I'S I I1c I „I_ , mA rq-.:Ilatic}ns of thc Ncmon( ll Hood hrl U[JM. I'r(11,.,1nt PNJ P), I il:C "1 1 A' 111, (',)dG Of'1'CJ1:I-,d RC'-' lllltiolm I-140'1ti), ;1a. ill ('11cct vAhcll (Ic%villpri [It 1,I.Is '.1itllin a Flo.• . i:11 I'[I'mul I ki/jal Arc,L illitll risk,Irc';s;}. 4I Ik: ISmji:(.•t, ;srC rCquil0.1 to Q:c:nr-l'ti with I( 11Z r'egLi1,l 1;)IIs ;: ;t11)111:rtAI II; ticwti(III {i[l. I .'. I'"c uclti•iSCtI tI141I T'R ICIIt:, tlIL' nlilri�lllltl7 t:ll�..l;.r.1 ,s ��'s. IM,th I-wv [IIc NHP. I.()C ll celrl11111.InitV 11(Wd 01c11t�X1.".� I11, V 1i11 ;1.1 II,-11._ I;Ircl:: [11jIt CUIJ be ,tuuc J' 4trictiVc 111d'A'0111d t(IkC prCCk: UI-ICC Over the I1111,l11l All '1! L ' �11'lltllds. .�1 1111' I)' I ;114-I1t.'I-tV i311;. `ii; 1 '.C'.I I'l'1111."..'lil„11't 1' I'4•';L'ilII .1! i.' I I'.' lII'v, 11 i]l- 1 k'%'-I 11;1 ,;rd /,l.Il.' .I. ,i 'ullti(11, 1.,, II C III t. jCI_'[. I .,, .I I:s;;lr,l ,',ti ll. r'.' ,1t II;IIcd Il I I i\ Im,s I;Ioo d Inslirl!) ", 14;n:' \LIII,: (I 1''? V. �' 111t'1; t'jrl I},.' c,.�-, I it1 ,1117 Flood i I I ';lr(i r1 ; ' ,';1 I n; l �r(11 (I 1:1 ', t Illth:�'i' �i: hata;.lI1111:1-1.ol,911 11A I It 111(.'rC' :Il l' P' irdl'u-� LIIL 1,,cil Flood L?1'III1litrlf' 'ti, pk-;t,l c-.: ''.:;11t t the applicable c t1".lill4 J1(11' cc�urd,t aun>, p' 'nwy' below: o Oahu: C'it\ L,11J (:.'„Iomy of Honolulu, Department of 1113t[i,is (808) 70N-t 098. 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. 1),[,01111CIII , I'lll l.1 Works (808) 241-4846. t'.IRT S/tHA6, CHIEF ENGINEER p17 5UZANN9D. CASR DAYW Y. IGE 01AIRPE:RFON r.UMERNOA OF MAWA4 p BOARD OF LAND ANU INAT URAL RUSOURCU COM MMION ON WATRR RESOURCE q 6SANAGHMRNr dund and STATE OF HAWAH DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL ]RESOURCES LAND Drvis[ON r , POST QFMCI" I3OX W) HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 0, + July 12, 2019 "� L7r" < C MEMORANDUM J��„ cxa c1 TO: DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources X Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation ,N�,.Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife _Div. of State Parks &Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands -X-Land Division — Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator' SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'I Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project LOCATION: Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 APPLICANT: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 2019. If no response is received by this elate, we will assume your agency has no comments. If you have any questions about this request, please contact Carlene Nakamura at 587-0417 or by email at dariene.k.nakemura®hawaii.gov. Thank you. (Vf We have no objections. { } We have no comments. ( } Comments are attach Signed: Print Name: / 71 Date: Attachments cc: Central Files DANI D Y. IG E GOVERNOR OF HAWAII i STATE OF HAWAII Sr,,t«Hn�a DEPARTMENT OF LAND ANI1 NATL1IIA1. RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST 01`111 l 130X 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 90809 August 19, 2019 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc, Attn: Mr. William Bow 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Dear Mr. Bow: SUZANNE D. CASE CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF i.AND AND NATURAL RFSOMPS COMMISSION ON WATER RF.SOURCfiE IIIANAC01i3NT via email: wbow@howengineering.com SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project locate at Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK; (3) 8-9-004:001 on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the subject matter. In addition to our previous comments dated August 2, 2019, enclosed are comments from the (a) Division of Aquatic Resources, (b) Division of Forestry & Wildlife, and (c) Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417 or email: darlene.k.nakan�ura ct1�s :nraii.4 a �� . Thank you. Sincerely, r' Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files cs ► k SIIZANNR A. CASK DAVIVY.IGE A?r; rUaY,r' *� CHAIDNAT R noV'EnNolio, IIAWA+- W �.• IspARGorGAIO ANDNA'CUNRVA URCE 1,9 � [YlklAllti510fi ON WA'CF.R R'I�iOURCE MANAGEMENT A; �gt�d 4' ;t s't'ATE OF HAWAII l" VaA'�, H,N,'t DFPA RTM ENTOF LAN .' ND [�i� ATI IRAL RESOURCES ON AIL 12 2019 POST OFVICF 13OX 621 Mwon &Aq'uaUcResourn 110NOLUL }IAWA❑ 96849 July 12, 2015 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: r; r c.IiY; X Div. of Aquatic Resources X Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X .Engineering Division, X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife ,n _Div. of State Parks `- X Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division - Hawaii District X Historic Preservation I FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator '-�& SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project LOCATION: Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 APPLICANT: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 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 darlene.k.nakamura@?hawaii.gov. Thank you. ( ) We have no objections. } We have no comments. - } Comments are attached. Signed: Print Name: � l'a L^i�'r •'� Date:� Attachments cc: Central Files DAVID V. IGL y , r-� SrFATE 0 F 11 W .A l I IrF1"1!t"iill,til f}I E.1'w'IS .A1Sa111 I;�l 1z' tid h,1� n 11'I `.I I ih+ i',1� 1. `• I I-.1 I I I: -. I. ,f I - nrfll', ) L I C X/ 1 `?s.i 1 t9 (}A R Ili `)(17.3- J,0: Iiri.111 .i_ Meiison DAI1 \dfliill istrator FROM: Nicole 5anderlin ���-�— , AgUat1c Biolouist SUBJECT: Scoping and Farly ConsuIttltitln ror the Prt111aw(j \,IiI()II,I Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project RcquC41Q,uhrniued by: Russell Y. Tsuji, Lana dnilni o-al(lr t1 0f11}10,l'-Mi101i'i. 5t-}tlth Klrn.1, I,Ia d llFI I,Iw'<+,lii. f"NiK: (3) 8-9-004:001 Location or Project: brier Descr1ptilIll of f'I'0j4lt: The Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to improve Miloli'i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Restrooms, pavilion, parking lot, and walkways will be demolished and re -constructed or refurbished to meet current ADA standards. Comments: ❑ No Comments E Comments Attached I h:111L ,%I1 `Y W11I� �1 111;_! I,) "l( i 1t' ��III Ir: (l11'II1 Ikl",, :111,.i1111111t'Pl( on tllc p1-w1L1.,C11 11R)(CCt. Should + ;911 _ I'.I11 !II,' +I' lI'.'L I 1 ,i11_ (� 1 •" ll i 9, l"•i 1I Irht1 II'tlIII'II t1+ I"el'1C11' 2III(.1 Q fr1171C1it II11 t11ose Hi ian J. Nc'11';I 11. DAR Admimstrator DAR# 5973 Comments The DAR West Hawaii requests that these issues be addressed in the environmental assessment: -Environmental impacts of construction including sedimentation from dust and dirt during demolition of current facilities and construction of new buildings and features to the near shore ecosystem and ponds and tidepools in the area. -Environmental impacts of the new septic tank and the proposed leach field on the near shore ecosystem. kl4- DAVID Y, IQE GOVERNOR OF 4MNI t'(I' III TO: 14' f=13IIA�' SUBJECT LOCATION: APPLICANT -A C•LI��1M//pply..b NIIP Q1YIS1rJ!`,.1 1 t ?I AUG -8 AM lip STATE, OF IIAWAIII P i ll -PAR'VMF.N,r OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES 111RA7Lrr L30`1!il I_ I.ANIlD1VI5C[lN f TA F UI�l1fI A f I POST OFFICE BOX 021 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96909 July 12, 2019 MEMORANDUM DLNR Agencies; X Div. of Aquatic Resources X Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife []iv. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division — Hawaii District X Historic Preservation S U7.4 NNIS D. CASE CHAIRPERSON DOAN0 or LAND AND NATURAI. RESOURCIi3 POhINUSSION ON WAITR RIiSOURC8 HANACLARNT Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Miloli'i Beech Park Accessibility Improvement Project Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. can behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 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 ernail at darlene.k.nakamura @ hawaii.go . Thank you. ( +✓' We have Mobjectlil v) We have Comment Signed: Print Name. DAVID Administrator Date: Attachments cc: Central Files �✓" a► 1y, Sit l%ANNE 1).CAN 1°. l6�'�`.'"J SL P •' �• CHAIRPERSON DAVID Y. IGF_ GOV1:: ANON OF IMYMI . A tY 6a �' .y� �{� _ � ROA[tl7ON I,ANUANI)NA'CUItAI.ItFSOUIICI F CONWHS10N ON WMVit ItNSOURM 6IANA(MMM' 5'I'ATE OF HAWAII d+rd4iM+j8�` DETARENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND iXVISION POST OFFICE MIX 0-11 HONOLULU, 11AWAI 196 (09 July 12, 2019: MEMORANDUM —1 �y'' � �y' TO: Dl_NR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources X Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation "-C X Engineering Division_` .= X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife 1-1 Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division -- Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Scoping and Early Consultation for the Proposed Milloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project LOCATION: Hoopuloa-Miloli'i, South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 APPLICANT: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. on behalf of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by August 1, 2019. If no response is received by this date, we wiii 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 darlene.k.nakamura@hawaii.gov. Thank you. �rU1€'t° r�i1Yl ..�� I caaJr l r` Attachments cc: Central Files } We have no objections. ( } We have no comments. Comments are attached. Signed:i�L Print Narne: I`" /1is Vic, ( k r1t% , Date: 1 A(-:(. i S Harry Kim Mayor Wil Okabe 141rrnrrg►irrg Director auritp of Waal t DEPARTMENT OF PARKS AND RECREATION 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 o Hilo, Hawaii 96720 (808) 961-8311 • Fax (808) 961-8411 Email: narks_ recreation(ii)hawaiicount http-Hwww.hawaiicount uv/parks-and-recreation/ November 25, 2019 State of Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural Resources Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands 1151 Punchbowl Street Room 131 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 [Advanced copy w/ attachment via email: Sam uel.J.Lemmo@hawaii.gov] Attn: Mr. Samuel J. Lemmo, Administrator Roxcie L. Waltjen Director Maurice C. Messina Deputy Director Subject: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvements Project; Job No. PR-4469 TMK (3)$-9-004:001 [State Land Use Conservation District, General Subzone] The County of Hawaii is under federal court order to implement accessibility improvements at the subject park in an expedited timeframe. In the course of our project planning process, we are informed that the site is located in the General Subzone of the State Land Use Conservation District. As such, we understand that the project's scope and the park's redevelopment potential are predominantly influenced and controlled by your agency and its interpretation, application and enforcement of Hawai'i Revised Statutes §183C and Hawaii Administrative Rules §13-5. Therefore, we respectfully request your guidance in the development of this park's architectural barrier removal scope, which is considerably broad and involved. Miloli`i Village, in which the park is located, is quite isolated geographically, located at the extreme end of an approximately five mile drive off of Highway 11 in which one descends roughly 3,400 feet in elevation, in the southeastern portion of the island. The park is a vitally important resource for the community in that all manners of parties and community gatherings are held at the park's halau structure, the pavilion is used as a community library and education center, the sports court is the main venue for recreation, and camping in the park is a cherished pastime for countless families in the village. We've held two community meetings at the park in the past two months in an attempt to understand the needs and concerns of the community relative to how they use park and to obtain feedback on the proposed scope of the project in order to guide us in delivering an end product that would be of greatest benefit to the park's most frequent users. So far, it seems that the majority sentiment regarding park improvements is to retain the park amenities and features that currently exist while minimizing the amount of changes and improvements to the park as possible. However, we are of the position that both the restroom and halau/pavilion structures must be replaced in their entirety due to their age and current conditions and extensive need for DLNR — OCCL — Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project November 25, 2019 Page 2 repair and modifications. The attached site plan is provided with extensive annotation in an attempt to accurately convey the existing conditions and to propose to the community the preferred scope of the proposed project. This is where we are in need of guidance from your agency to determine what your rules dictate and how they influence what is possibly in the redevelopment of this site. We have consulted with the Planning Department on their rules and regulations and were advised by Mr. Alex Roy, Planner to contact your office for assistance immediately. We have also consulted with the Department of Public Works Engineering Division on how their rules and regulations influence the decisions made on our project's scope. Upon your review of this correspondence, we would be extremely appreciative if you would contact our Park Planner, Mr. James Komata (961-8531 or James.Komata@hawaiicounty.gov) at your earliest convenience to discuss this matter in greater detail. We have a team of design professionals awaiting further guidance on this project and the Miloh'i Village residents are anxiously awaiting further information from us on what the park's improvement project's scope will entail. Truly Yours, 11---1 �TxcieWaltjen Director Attachment: 20191125L_DLNR-OCCLSL.rw—SLU-CD.Consultation. MapExhibit cc: Mr. James Komata, Park Planner (via email) Mr. Jeffrey Ochi, Park Projects Manager (via email) Mr. Alex Roy, Planner, Planning Department (via email) County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. AT*AUSTIN, TSUTSUMI & ASSOCIATES, INC. CIVIL ENGINEERS • SURVEYORS CONTINUING THE ENG NEERING PRACTICE POUNCED 0Y H A. R AUSTIN IN 193E TERRANCE S ARASHIR•v. P E ALRIFNNE'AJ 1 H WONG. ?' E €_EEJ AP DEANNA MR HAYASFI:. P E PA(-11K. ARITA. -.E ERIK 5 KANE-SHIR-� _ P L. S ! EEC AP 19-308 .MATT K. NAKA'.MOTC P E GARRET' K. TCK�',OKA P E August 22, 2019 Department of Land and Natural Resources Land Division Kalanimoku Building, Room 220 1151 Punchbowl Street Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Phone: 587-0446 Gentlemen: Subject: Request for Shoreline Certification of Milolii Beach Park Being all of School Grant 8, Apana 5 and Portions of the Government Lands of Milolii and Omokaa At South Kona, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii TMK: (3) 8-9-004: 001 Owner: State of Hawaii Site 89-1151 Milolii Road Address: Captain Cook, Hawaii 96704 We respectfully submit the following for processing of shoreline certification for building setback purposes related to the above -mentioned property: 7 prints Proposed shoreline certification maps 3 sets Photographs of proposed shoreline 1 each Application 1 each $ 75.00 Check for application fee This shoreline certification is being processed as part of the County of Hawaii Accessibility Improvements Project. The field survey to locate the shoreline was conducted on March 3, 2019, but the shoreline runs along the edge of seawall. Should there be any questions, please feel free to call me at 533-3646. Your favorable consideration in this matter would be greatly appreciated. Sincerely, AUSTIN TSUTSUMI & ASSOCIATES INC. //� K M l FW_ ERIK S. KAN SHIRO, L.P.L.S. Director of Surveying REPLY TO: OFFICES IN: 501 SUMNER STREET, SUITE 521 • HONOLULU, HAWAII 96817-5031 I HONOLULU, HAWAII PHONE (SOS) 533-3646 • FAX (808) 526-1 267 WAILUKU, MAU!, HAWAII EMAIL : atahnl'�atahawaF.com HILO. HAWAII State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources Land Division SHORELINE CERTIFICATION —APPLICATION FORM The attached Application Form is for persons requesting a shoreline certification. Please note the following important points: 1) Please refer to Chapter 13-222, Shoreline Certifications, Hawaii Administrative Rules, when applying for a shoreline certification. You can find these rules at our website: http://www.hawaii.gov/dlnr/land/rules 2) A fee of $75 must accompany your application. This fee may be waived for federal, State and county projects. This fee will be returned only where the application is withdrawn prior to the Department initiating its review for completeness. 3) You will be responsible for reimbursement of any costs incurred by the State for processing of the shoreline certification, such as travel costs for site inspections. We will inform you of these costs when we notify you of the State Land Surveyor's proposed certification or rejection. You must remit payment prior to the Department releasing the signed shoreline maps. 4) The processing of shoreline certifications is subject to automatic approval. If the Department fails to render a decision on an application within 90 days from our acceptance of a completed application or the expiration of any extension granted, then the shoreline application shall be deemed certified. We will inform you of the commencement and completion dates. 5) If you find an encroachment during the shoreline survey, we recommend that you do not submit a shoreline application but rather contact the Land Division District Branch in the applicable county to resolve the encroachment. Shoreline applications will be rejected where encroachments are found. 6) Pursuant to §13-222-26, HAR, persons or agencies meeting certain criteria have standing to appeal any proposed certification or rejection within 20 days of the OEQC publication. If you would like to file an appeal, please refer to the administrative rules and the Department's "Shoreline Certification — Notice of Appeal " form. All applications must be complete to be considered for processing. Please submit your completed application form or direct questions to: Department of Land and Natural Resources Land Division 1151 Punchbowl Street, Room 220 Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Phone: (808) 587-0446; Fax: (808) 587-0455 Please do NOT send your application to our neighbor island District Branches. LD-175 (rev. 05/16/03) Page 1 of 4 For DLNR use only: Case file no.: STATE OF HAWAII Date application recvd: DEPARTMENT OF LAND & NATURAL RESOURCES Date applic. complete: Completion date (+90): 1 st OEQC notice: SHORELINE CERTIFICATION 2nd OEQC notice: APPLICATION FORM Date appeals due (+20): Date briefs due: Date of decision (+60): I. APPLICANT/AGENT Applicant means the person submitting an application for shoreline certification. Applicant name: Austin Tsutsumi & Associates, Inc. Applicant address: 501 Sumner Street, Suite 521 Honolulu, Hawaii 96817 Phone numbers: (808) 533-3646 __(808 )526-1267 ekaneshiro@atahawaii.com Phone rax E-mail II. PROPERTY OWNER Property owner means the equitable or legal holder of interest in, or the lessee holding under a recorded lease for the property for which a shoreline certification is requested, or the authorized agent. Owner name: State of Hawaii Owner address: Kalanimoku Building - 1151 Punchbowl Street Honolulu, HI 96813 Signature: _ Date: III. LOCATION AND ADDRESS Island: Town, District: Address: IV. PURPOSE IX 1 Oahu ( ) Kauai ( ) Hawaii ( ) Maui South Kona 89-1151 Milolii Road Captain Cook, HI 96704 State the purpose for which the certification is being applied: For Setback Purposes ( ) Molokai ( ) Lanai LD-175 (rev. 05/16/03) Page 2 of 4 V. CHECKLIST OF ENCLOSURES () At least three (3) sets of color photographs of the shoreline, in accordance with §13-222-8, HAR: () Shoreline, as delineated on the map, is indicated on each photograph. () Permanent markings on the ground or flaggings are indicated on the photographs. () Each photograph is labeled by number or alphabet to coincide with the map showing the direction the photograph was taken. () Photographs provide accurate perspectives of the shoreline in relation to permanent markings or other land features. () Each photograph is marked with the date and time taken. ( ) At least seven (7) maps of the shoreline, in accordance with §13-222-9, HAR: () Maps are on whiteprints and are one of the following sizes (in inches): 8.5 x 13, 10 x 15, 13 x 23, 15 x 21, 21 x 32, 22 x 36, 24 x 36, 30 x 36, 36 x 42, 42 x 42-72. () Maps are drawn using an engineer or architect scale, in units of feet. Scale is clearly noted on the map. No reduced or enlarged maps allowed. () Maps are based on an actual field survey conducted within the prior 90 days. () Maps have the licensed surveyor's seal and testament indicating the work was done by the surveyor or under the surveyor's supervision. () Maps indicate true north pointing towards the top. () Map title and reference to location include the original source of title and name of awardee, patentee, or grantee and the ili, ahupuaa, and the TMK and the property owner's name and address. () Maps show all permanent identification marks established on the ground and all pertinent azimuths and distances. () Maps indicate the type of shoreline being determined (i.e., vegetation line, debris line, upper reaches of the wash of waves, face of artificial structure, or combination). () At least two (2) of the maps show the direction the photographs were taken and the point or shoreline depicted in the photographs. () Field survey was conducted on _ 3/3/19 —by_ Dennies Duropan _ (date of tieia survey) (name of person who conducted field survey) () The licensed land surveyor who made or supervised the field survey was: Name _ Erik Kaneshiro Address 501 Sumner Street, Suite 521 Phone no. Honolulu. Hawaii 96817 ( ) Application fee of $75 is enclosed. () Statement signed by property owner granting the State of Hawaii the right to enter the property. () Statement(s) signed by applicable owners granting the State of Hawaii the right to enter land not owned by the property owner necessary for access. LD-175 (rev. 05/16/03) Page 3 of 4 () Copy of any federal, State or county enforcement or other legal action involving the subject shoreline. () If shoreline is being located at the base of a manmade structure, copy of all documents supporting that the structure has been approved by the appropriate government agencies or is exempt from such approval. V1. CERTIFICATION I hereby certify that the statements and information contained in this application, including all attachments, are true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and understand that if any statements are shown to be false or misrepresented, this application may be rejected. Further, understand that the Department may review any shoreline certification during its 12-month validity period and may rescind the certification where there is substantial misrepresentation or material fact in the application, whether intentional or unintentional, as determined by the State Land Surveyor or the Department. Erik Kaneshiro Printed Name X Signature 8/21 /19 Date LD-175 (rev. 05/16/03) Page 4 of 4 ..... .... .. SHORELINE CERTIFICATION MAP BEING ALL OF POIFTIONE OF THE CKTARNMENT -IDS OF m1wul mo omow mum kall. H-1 11,11-004i DOI nor n. School rant 8, Apana �5 SHORELINE CERTIFICATION OF MILOLII BEACH PARK TMK: (3) 8-9-004 PHOTO# 1 MARCH 3, 2019 1:30 PM l �.•.:,.sy�'•,.• — ..n kra. i .ram 477 ,, .. �m �—*' _�"'� .mow -- _ '•`-� �,. •• •. ' .. y r PHOTO# 2 MARCH 3, 2019 1:30 PM SHORELINE CERTIFICATION OF MILOLII BEACH PARK TMK: (3) 8-9-004 PHOTO# 3 MARCH 3, 2019 1:30 PM PHOTO# 4 MARCH 3, 2019 1:30 PM SHORELINE CERTIFICATION OF MILOLII BEACH PARK TMK: (3) 8-9-004 - ., -1. - W: PHOTO#5 MARCH 3,2019 1:30 PM PHOTO#6 MARCH 3, 2019 1:30 PM DAVED Y. IGE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII `o4�nd and Haro !7 H Scare of H02'\ REF: OCCL: TF Roxcie Waltj en N STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES OFFICE OF CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 Director County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 SUZANNE D. CASE CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT ROBERT K MASUDA FIRST DEPUTY M. KALEO MANUEL DEPUTY DBRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES BOATING AND OCEAN RECREATION BUREAU OF CONVEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT CONSERVATION AND COASTAL LANDS CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION KAHOOLAWE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATEPARKS COR: HA-20-90 DEC - 3 2013 SUBJECT: Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvements Project; Job No. PR-4469. Hoopuloa-Milolii, South Kona, Hawaii TMK:(3) 8-9-004:001 Dear Ms. Waltjen: The Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL) is in receipt of your correspondence and attached Site Plan regarding the subject matter. According to the information you provided, the County of Hawaii and its Department of Parks and Recreation are under federal court order to implement accessibility improvements for the Milolii Beach Park. The proposed project involves improving the facilities to make them compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The attached Site Plan offered more annotation and details regarding the existing conditions and preferred scope of the project. The proposed ADA improvements to the Milolii Beach Park will include the relocation and replacement of both the restroom and halau/pavilion structures due to their age, current conditions, and extensive need for repair and modifications. Additionally, the existing outdoor basketball and volleyball courts as well as the existing asphalt parking area will need to be replaced and repaved according to ADA standards. The community has also expressed the desire to have a portion of the park paved as a turnaround for trucks with boat trailers as well as to address safety concerns related to the uneven surfaces that currently exist in the area. Other community supported improvements that will also need to be ADA compliant include the provision for a new children playground to replace the playground elements that were removed in the past as well as the provision of picnic/camping amenities to serve those with disabilities. The Department of Parks and Recreation would also like to demolish and replace a water storage tank and shed to meet the Department of Health requirements for these types of structures. The Department of Parks and Recreation has scoped the proposed improvements to the Milolii Beach Park and held two community meetings at the park to better understand the needs and concerns regarding the subject matter and proposed improvements. Your letter states that the Department of REF: OCCL: TF COR: HA-20-90 Roxcie Waltjen County of Hawaii — Department of Parks and Recreation Parks and Recreation would like to retain the park amenities and features that currently exist while minimizing the amount of changes and improvements to the park as possible. The Department of Parks and Recreation is seeking OCCL's guidance regarding the Conservation District's Rules and Regulations and their potential impact to the redevelopment of the site as well as the appropriate level of permitting for the proposed improvements. OCCL notes that the proposed project will occur on the parcel with the TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 and lies within the General and Special Subzones of the Conservation District. The Milolii Beach Park was created by Executive Order (EO) 2435 and has been under the County of Hawaii's management since 1985. Based on the information you have provided, it appears that the proposed projects will not expand the park or its facilities beyond what currently exists. Besides the demolition and relocation of the restrooms, halau/pavilion, and water storage structures, most of the proposed projects involves minor alterations or cosmetic work to existing structures. OCCL has therefore determined that .the proposed Accessibility Improvements Project at Milolii Beach Park is an identified land use pursuant to Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), § 13-5-22 P-8 STRUCTURES AND LAND USES, EXISTING (B-1) Demolition, removal, or minor alteration of existing structures, facilities, land, and equipment. Any historic properties shall be evaluated by the department for historical significance and this would require filing a Site Plan Approval application. Applications can be found at https:Hdlnr.hawaii.gov/occl/forms-2/. Please provide evidence that the Department of Parks and Recreation has consulted with the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and initiated historical significance review of the proposed project by submitting the Hawaii Revised Statures (HRS) 6E Submittal Form. OCCL also suggests that the Department of Parks and Recreation declare the project exempt from the preparation of an environmental assessment (EA) under the authority of HRS Chapter 343 and HAR Chapter 11-200.1 or provide evidence that an EA has been published and reviewed. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contactrevor Fitzpa of the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands at 587-0373. Sincerely, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands CC: Hawaii District Land Division Office State Historic Preservation Division County of Hawaii, Planning Department 2 Harry Kim Mayor Wil Okabe Managing Director 6jun r of �ttfun Vt DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 7 - Hilo, Hawaii 96720-4224 (808) 961-8321 , Fax (808) 961-8630 public—works@hawaiicounty.gov July 26, 2019 William Bow Bow Engineering & Development, Inc, 1963 South Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, HI 96826 (via email to: wbow@bowengineering.com) Subject: Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvements Project Scoping and Early Consultation Tax Map Key�(3) 8-9-004:001 David Yamamoto, P.E. Director Allan G. Simeon, P.E. Deputy Director We have reviewed the request for early consultation for an Environmental Assessment and our comments are as follows: 1. All development generated runoff shall be disposed of on -site and shall not be directed . toward adjacent properties. 2. Flood zones VE and AE affect the subject parcel as designated by the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM). New construction and substantial improvements shall comply with Chapter 27 — Floodplain Management — of the Hawaii County Code. Existing drainage patterns with respect to adjacent properties shall be maintained. Please identify the flood zone boundaries on the site plan exhibits. 3. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10 —Erosion and Sedimentation Control — of the Hawaii County Code. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Natalie Whitworth of our Kona Engineering Division office at 323-4863. �Y Ben Ishii, Division Chief Engineering Division ZW, Copy: William Bow (hard copy) Engineering-HILO/KONA Planning Department- Hilo County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. _y. �'• n'rF'rr its 1 � xp f�F •u •.0 h4x�� DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY COUNTY OF HAWAII 345 KEKUANA6'A STREET, SUITE 20 HILO. HAWAI'I 96720 TELEPHONE (808) 961-8050 - FAX (808) 961-8657 August 12, 2019 Mr. wl'Ilanl Bowe Bow 1_;ll"inecring & Developillettt, 111c. 1953 Scluth Bcretitma Street, 1-11 [-A 1 lonolulu, HI 90826 Dcar Mr. Row: subject: Miloli`i Beach Paris Accessibility Impl-oveRl ent Project Applicant —.Jeff Ochi, Project Manager 'Fax -Vial) lacy 8-9-004:0111 We 11,1vc reviewwfccl the s1.1113ect i111111icat10Il and 1lawrc the followving comments and conditions. PICZlsc be itlli}rrllcd that the 5tl111ccl property is not wVithin the sclvIce litrtits of the ] epartlllclit's existing water system facilities. '111crel-01-c, the. Department's existiflg wwater system facilities calmot support (lie proposed subdivision at tills tulle. 1'Mellsive mili ovenlcnls and Lsdditions. which may include, but not be limited to, source, storagc, hooster plilllps, transmissiorl, .lnd distrihtition facilities, would be required. Shc}uld there he alIV clttc.stit;uy, 171e:IW ecltltdct NMI'. '1'rc,w SI-tillf.11'r1 01' c ur Watcr Resources and Planning Branch at 961-9070, extension 255. �,iilccrcl� yours, Kclth K. Mamoto, MI -wager -Chief 1 ilgillc ul, 1'S:dfg copy — County of] lawai`i. Nwinitig Delvi'mlent County of I hwai`i. Dcpartmcnt of Parks and Recreation ... Water, Our Wost (Precious Pgsource ... Ka Wai,4 Kline ... The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT COMMENT LETTERS United States Department of the Interior FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office 300 Ala Moana Boulevard, Room 3-122 Honolulu, Hawaii 96850 In Reply Refer to: 0IEPIF00-2020-TA-0433 Mr. William F. Bow, M.S. Environmental Director Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 U.S. FISH & WILDLI", SERVICE August 31, 2020 Subject: Technical Assistance for the Draft Environmental Assessment for the Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvements in the South Kona District, Island and County of Hawaii Dear Mr. William F. Bow: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) received your correspondence on August 8, 2020, requesting comments for the Draft Environmental Assessment for the Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project at Tax Map Key (TMK): (3) 8-0-004:001, in South Kona. The Service offers the following comments to assist you in your planning process so that impacts to trust resources can be avoided through site preparation, construction, and operation. Our comments are provided under the authorities of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.0 1531 etseq.). Project Description The Department of Parks and Recreation proposes to improve the Milolii Beach Park building and amenities that comply with the current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. The project includes the replacement of an existing pavilion with proper permits to meet the current ADA standards; the replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards; the replacement of the non -potable storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; the improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible, the improvement of the walkways connecting to the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to ADA accessibility; the reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball and volleyball courts; the construction of a new playground; the designation of a boat turnaround are area, and the installation of a vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and pavilion. INTERIOR REGION 9 COLUMBIA—PACIFIC NORTHWEST IDAHO, MONTANA*, OREGON*, WASHINGTON `PARTIAL INTERIOR REGION 12 PACIFIC ISLANDS AMERICAN SAMOA, GUAM, HAWAII, NORTHERN MARIANA I S LAN D S Mr. William F. Bow 2 Based on information you provided and pertinent information in our files, including data compiled by the Hawaii Biodiversity and Mapping Project, there are ten listed species in the immediate vicinity of the project area: the federally endangered Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus), the threatened Hawaiian goose (Branta (Nesochen) sandvicensis), endangered Hawaiian stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), endangered Hawaiian coot (Fulica alai), endangered Hawaiian duck (Anas wyvilliana), the threatened Green sea turtle (Chelonia mydas), endangered Hawksbill sea turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata), endangered Hawaiian yellow -faced bees (Hylaeus anthracinus), endangered Procaris hawaiana, endangered Fetericaris chaceorum, endangered Pacific damselfly (Megalagrion pacificum), and the endangered Orange -black (Megalagrion xanthomelas). Additionally, the endangered Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), band-rumped storm -petrel (Oceanodroma castro), and the threatened Newell's shearwater (Puffinus auricularis newelli) may transit the project area flying to upland breeding colonies. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to listed species, the following measures are recommended: Hawaiian hoary bat The federally endangered Hawaiian hoary bat roosts in both exotic and native woody vegetation across all islands and will leave young unattended in trees and shrubs when they forage. If trees or shrubs 15 feet or taller are cleared during the pupping season, there is a risk that young bats could inadvertently be harmed or killed since they are too young to fly or may not move away. Additionally, Hawaiian hoary bats forage for insects from as low as 3 feet to higher than 500 feet above the ground and can become entangled in barbed wire used for fencing. To avoid and minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: Do not disturb, remove, or trim woody plants greater than 15 feet tall during the bat birthing and pup rearing season (June 1 through September 15). Do not use barbed wire for fencing. Hawaiian goose The federally threatened Hawaiian goose is found on the islands of Hawaii, Maui, Molokai, and Kauai. They are observed in a variety of habitats, but prefer open areas, such as pastures, golf courses, wetlands, natural grasslands and shrublands, and lava flows. Threats to the species include introduced mammalian and avian predators, wind facilities, and vehicle strikes. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian geese we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • Do not approach, feed, or disturb Hawaiian geese. • If Hawaiian geese are observed loafing or foraging within the project area during the breeding season (September through April), have a biologist familiar with the nesting behavior of nene survey for nests in and around the project area prior to the resumption of Mr. William F. Bow 3 any work. Repeat surveys after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). o Cease all work immediately and contact the Service for further guidance if a nest is discovered within a radius of 150 feet of proposed work, or a previously undiscovered nest is found within said radius after work begins. In areas where Hawaiian geese are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on -site. Green and Hawksbill sea turtles The Service consults on sea turtles and their use of terrestrial habitats (beaches where nesting and/or basking is known to occur), whereas the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) consults on sea turtles and their use of off -shore and open ocean habitats. We recommend that you consult with NMFS regarding the potential impacts from the proposed project to sea turtles in off -shore and open ocean habitats. Green sea turtles may nest on any sandy beach area in the Pacific Islands. Hawksbill sea turtles exhibit a wide tolerance for nesting substrate (ranging from sandy beach to crushed coral) with nests typically placed under vegetation. Both species exhibit strong nesting site fidelity. Nesting occurs on beaches from May through September, peaking in June and July, with hatchlings emerging through November and December. Construction on, or in the vicinity of, beaches can result in sand and sediment compaction, sea turtle nest destruction, beach erosion, contaminant and nutrient runoff, and an increase in direct and ambient light pollution which may disorient hatchlings or deter nesting females. Off -road vehicle traffic may result in direct impacts to sea turtles and nests, and also contributes to habitat degradation through erosion and compaction. Projects that alter the natural beach profile, such as nourishment and hardening, including the placement of seawalls, jetties, sandbags, and other structures, are known to reduce the suitability of on -shore habitat for sea turtles. These types of projects often result in sand compaction, erosion, and additional sedimentation in nearshore habitats, resulting in adverse effects to the ecological community and future sea turtle nests. The hardening of a shoreline increases the potential for erosion in adjacent areas, resulting in subsequent requests to install stabilization structures or conduct beach nourishment in adjacent areas. Given projected sea level rise estimates, the likelihood of increase in storm surge intensity, and other factors associated with climate change, we anticipate that beach erosion will continue and likely increase. Where possible, projects should consider alternatives that avoid the modification or hardening of coastlines. Beach nourishment or beach hardening projects should evaluate the long-term effect to sea turtle nesting habitat and consider the cumulative effects. To avoid and minimize project impacts to sea turtles and their nests we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: No vehicle use on or modification of the beach/dune environment during the sea turtle nesting or hatching season (May to December). Mr. William F. Bow 4 Do not remove native dune vegetation. • Incorporate applicable best management practices regarding Work in Aquatic Environments (see enclosed) into the project design. • Have a biologist familiar with sea turtles conduct a visual survey of the project site to ensure no basking sea turtles are present. o If a basking sea turtle is found within the project area, cease all mechanical or construction activities within 100 feet until the animal voluntarily leaves the area. o Cease all activities between the basking turtle and the ocean. • Remove any project -related debris, trash, or equipment from the beach or dune if not actively being used. • Do not stockpile project -related materials in the intertidal zone, reef flats, or stream channels. Lighting: Optimal nesting habitat is a dark beach free of barriers that restrict sea turtle movement. Nesting turtles may be deterred from approaching or laying successful nests on lighted or disturbed beaches. They may become disoriented by artificial lighting, leading to exhaustion and placement of a nest in an inappropriate location (such as at or below the high tide line). Hatchlings that emerge from nests may also be disoriented by artificial lighting. Inland areas visible from the beach should be sufficiently dark to allow for successful navigation to the ocean. To avoid and minimize project impacts to sea turtles from lighting we recommend incorporating the following applicable measures into your project description: Avoid nighttime work during the nesting and hatching season (May to December). Minimize the use of lighting and shield all project -related lights so the light is not visible from any beach. o If lights can't be fully shielded or if headlights must be used, fully enclose the light source with light filtering tape or filters. Incorporate design measures into the construction or operation of buildings adjacent to the beach to reduce ambient outdoor lighting such as: o Tinting or using automatic window shades for exterior windows that face the beach; o Reducing the height of exterior lighting to below 3 feet and pointed downward or away from the beach; and o Minimize light intensity to the lowest level feasible and, when possible, include timers and motion sensors. Hawaiian stilt, Hawaiian coot, and Hawaiian duck: Listed Hawaiian waterbirds are found in fresh and brackish -water marshes and natural or man- made ponds. Hawaiian stilts may also be found wherever ephemeral or persistent standing water may occur. Threats to these species include non-native predators, habitat loss, and habitat degradation. Hawaiian ducks are also subject to threats from hybridization with introduced mallards. Mr. William F. Bow Based on the project details provided, our information suggests that your project may result in standing water or the creation of open water, thus attracting Hawaiian waterbirds to the site. In particular, the Hawaiian stilt is known to nest in sub -optimal locations (e.g. any ponding water), if water is present. Hawaiian waterbirds attracted to sub -optimal habitat may suffer adverse impacts, such as predation and reduced reproductive success, and thus the project may create an attractive nuisance. Therefore, we recommend you work with our office during project planning so that we may assist you in developing measures to avoid impacts to listed species (e.g., fencing, vegetation control, predator management). To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to Hawaiian waterbirds we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • In areas where waterbirds are known to be present, post and implement reduced speed limits, and inform project personnel and contractors about the presence of endangered species on -site. • If water resources are located within or adjacent to the project site, incorporate applicable best management practices regarding work in aquatic environments into the project design (see enclosure). • Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology conduct Hawaiian waterbird nest surveys where appropriate habitat occurs within the vicinity of the proposed project site prior to project initiation. Repeat surveys again within 3 days of project initiation and after any subsequent delay of work of 3 or more days (during which the birds may attempt to nest). If a nest or active brood is found: o Contact the Service within 48 hours for further guidance. o Establish and maintain a 100-foot buffer around all active nests and/or broods until the chicks/ducklings have fledged. Do not conduct potentially disruptive activities or habitat alteration within this buffer. o Have a biological monitor that is familiar with the species' biology present on the project site during all construction or earth moving activities until the chicks/ducklings fledge to ensure that Hawaiian waterbirds and nests are not adversely impacted. Hawaiian petrel, Newell's shearwater, and band-rumped storm petrel Hawaiian seabirds may traverse the project area at night during the breeding, nesting and fledging seasons (March 1 to December 15). Outdoor lighting could result in seabird disorientation, fallout, and injury or mortality. Seabirds are attracted to lights and after circling the lights they may become exhausted and collide with nearby wires, buildings, or other structures or they may land on the ground. Downed seabirds are subject to increased mortality due to collision with automobiles, starvation, and predation by dogs, cats, and other predators. Young birds (fledglings) traversing the project area between September 15 and December 15, in their first flights from their mountain nests to the sea, are particularly vulnerable. To avoid and minimize potential project impacts to seabirds, the project: • Fully shield all outdoor lights so the bulb can only be seen from below bulb height and only use when necessary. Mr. William F. Bow Install automatic motion sensor switches and controls on all outdoor lights or turn off lights when human activity is not occurring in the lighted area. Avoid nighttime construction during the seabird fledging period, September 15 through December 15. Hawaiian yellow -faced bee, Hylaeus anthracinus General species information (bold islands are known populations): Species Islands Habitat H. anthracinus Hawaii, Maui, Kahoolawe, Lanai, Molokai, Oahu Coastal and lowland dry forests Coastal populations of yellow -faced bees occur in habitat along rocky shorelines with Scaevola taccada (naupaka) and Heliotropium foertherianum (tree heliotrope) with either landscaped vegetation, alien kiawe (Prosopis pallida), or bare rock inland. Bees are restricted to an extremely narrow corridor, typically 10-20 meters wide, and do not occur on sandy beaches or inland, or on landscaped native plants on hotel grounds. Documented nectar plants include naupaka, Sida fallax (ilima), Chamaesyce spp. (akoko), Argemone glauca (pua kala), Myoporum sandwicense (naio), and tree heliotrope. Threats to yellow -faced bees include habitat destruction and modification from land use change, nonnative plants, ungulates, and fire, along with predation by nonnative ants and wasps. To avoid and minimize project impacts to yellow -faced bees and their nests, we recommend you incorporate the following applicable measures into your project description: • If an action will occur in or adjacent to known occupied habitat, a buffer area around the habitat may be required and can be worked out on a site -specific basis through consultation with the Service. • For coastal species, protect all coastal strand habitat from human disturbance, including: o No fires or wood collecting o Leave woody debris in place o Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails o Post educational signs to inform people of the presence of sensitive species. Procaris hawaiana, Vetericaris chaceorum, M. pacificum, and M. xanthomelas M. pacificum is found in seepage -fed pools cut off from the main stream channel, usually in areas with thick vegetation. Formerly found on all islands, now known from Molokai, Maui, and Hawaii Islands at low elevations. M. xanthomelas is known from Hawaii, Maui, Lanai, Molokai, Oahu, and formerly Kauai. It breeds in a widespread number of sites, including anchialine pools, coastal wetlands, small streams, and artificial ponds at low elevations. Hawaiian damselflies are found in aquatic habitats across the islands, with high species endemism within islands. Breeding habitat includes anchialine pools, perennial streams, marshes, ponds, and even artificial pools and seeps. Major threats include introduced fish, amphibians, Mr. William F. Bow 7 and invertebrates in streams, reduced stream flow from drought and water diversion, small isolated populations, reduced habitat quality from ungulates and nonnative plants, and possibly over -collection. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recommended Standard Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments should be incorporated into the project description to minimize the degradation of water quality and impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Permits are required for accurate surveys of this species, so consult with the Service if work will be done in proximity to stream areas or within water bodies. Anchialine Pools P. hawaiana is restricted to a small number of anchialine pools on Hawaii and Maui, while V. chaceorum is found in only two anchialine pool areas of Hawaii. Threats to these species include habitat loss due to in -filling and bulldozing of anchialine pools, waste disposal including used oil and grease into pools, nonnative fish, human use of pools for bathing, water extraction, in -flow of fertilizer and pesticides, and collection for the aquarium trade. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recommended Standard Best Management Practices for Work in Aquatic Environments should be incorporated into the project description to minimize the degradation of water quality and impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Protect anchialine pools (both in and around) from the following human disturbance: o Restrict vehicles to existing roads and trails o Prevent trash, and other waste from entering into anchialine pools o Avoid or limit to the maximum extent practicable entrance into the anchialine pools Install educational signs near anchialine pools to inform people of the presence of sensitive species and habitats. Biosecurity and Invasive Species We are attaching our list of Biosecurity Protocols to prevent the introduction and spread of harmful invasive species on the island of Hawaii. We encourage you to incorporate the relevant measures into your project description and all contracts for the construction/maintenance of the proj ect. If this potential project should receive federal funding, federal permits, or any federal authorization, it will require a Section 7 consultation with the Service. The Service only conducts Section 7 consultations with the federal action agency or their designated representative. Mr. William F. Bow Thank you for participating with us in the protection of our endangered species. If you have any further questions or concerns regarding this consultation, please contact Eldridge Naboa, Fish and Wildlife Biologist, 808-933-6964, e-mail: eldridge_naboa@fws.gov. When referring to this project, please include this reference numbers: OIEPIF00-2020-TA-0433. Sincerely, Michelle Bogardus Island Team Manager Maui Nui and Hawaii Island Attachments: Biosecurity Protocols — Hawaii Island Aquatic Environments — Best Management Practices Mr. William F. Bow E BIOSECURTY PROTOCOL — HAWAII ISLAND (JULY 2018) The following biosecurity protocol (based on National Park Service, State of Hawaii, U.S. Fish and Wildlife, U.S. Geological Survey, and the DOI Office of Native Hawaiian Relations guidance) should be followed when operating on Hawaii Island to prevent the introduction of harmful invasive species including frogs, ants, weeds, and fungi into local natural areas (e.g., Hawaii Volcanoes National Park, Hakalau Forest National Wildlife Refuge, State of Hawaii "Natural Areas") and areas with native habitat (habitat that is primarily composed of native vegetation), other islands in Hawaiian archipelago, or the U.S. mainland. The protocol also includes suggestions for keeping field staff safe from certain invasive species. 1. All work vehicles, machinery, and equipment should be cleaned, inspected by its user, and found free of mud, dirt, debris and invasive species prior to entry into the natural areas or native habitat. a. Vehicles, machinery, and equipment must be thoroughly pressure washed in a designated cleaning area and visibly free of mud, dirt, plant debris, insects, frogs (including frog eggs) and other vertebrate species such as rats, mice and non -vegetative debris. A hot water wash is preferred. Areas of particular concern include bumpers, grills, hood compartments, areas under the battery, wheel wells, undercarriage, cabs, and truck beds (truck beds with accumulated material (intentionally placed or fallen from trees) are prime sites for hitchhikers). b. The interior and exterior of vehicles, machinery, and equipment must be free of rubbish and food. The interiors of vehicles and the cabs of machinery must be vacuumed clean. Floor mats shall be sanitized with a solution of >70% isopropyl alcohol or a freshly mixed 10% bleach solution. c. Any machinery, vehicles, equipment, or other supplies found to be infested with ants (or other invasive species) must not enter natural areas or native habitat. Treatment is the responsibility of the equipment or vehicle owner and operator. 2. Little Fire Ants — All work vehicles, machinery, and equipment should be inspected for invasive ants prior to entering the natural areas or native habitat. a. A visual inspection for little fire ants should be conducted prior to entry into natural areas or native habitat. b. Hygiene is paramount but even the cleanest vehicle can pick up a little fire ant. Place MaxForce Complete Brand Granular Insect Bait (1.0% Hydramethylnon; http://littlefireants.com/Maxforce%20Complete.pdf) into refillable tamper resistant bait stations. An example of a commercially available refillable tamper resistant bait station is the Ant Cafe Pro (https://www.antcafe.com/). Place a bait station (or stations) in vehicle. Note larger vehicles, such as trucks, may require multiple stations. Monitor bait stations frequently (every week at a minimum) and replace bait as needed. If the station does not have a sticker to identify the contents, apply a sticker listing contents to the station. c. Any machinery, vehicles, equipment, or other supplies found to be infested with ants (or other invasive species) must not enter natural areas or native habitat until it is sanitized and re -tested following a resting period. Infested vehicles must be sanitized following recommendations by the Hawaii Ant Lab (http://www.littlefireants.com/) or other ant control expert and in accordance Mr. William F. Bow 10 with all State and Federal laws. Treatment is the responsibility of the equipment or vehicle owner. d. Gravel, building materials, or other equipment such as portable buildings should be baited using MaxForce Complete Brand Granular Insect Bait (1.0% Hydramethylnon; http://littlefireants.com/Maxforce%20Complete.pdf) or AmdroPro (0.73% Hydramethylnon; http://littlefireants.com/Amdro%20Pro.pdf) following label guidance. e. Storage areas that hold field tools, especially tents, tarps, and clothing should be baited using MaxForce Complete Brand Granular Insect Bait (1.0% Hydramethylnon; http://littlefireants.com/Maxforce%20Complete.pdf) or AmdroPro (0.73% Hydramethylnon; http://littlefireants.com/Amdro%20Pro.pdf) following label guidance. 3. Base yards and staging areas inside and outside areas must be kept free of invasive species. a. Base yards and staging areas should be inspected at least weekly for invasive species and any found invasive removed immediately. Pay particular attention to where vehicles are parked overnight, keeping areas within 10-meters of vehicles free of debris. Parking on pavement and not under trees, while not always practical is best. b. Project vehicles or equipment stored outside of a base yard or staging area, such as a private residence, should be kept in a pest free area. 4. All cutting tools must be sanitized to prevent the Rapid Ohia Death (ROD) fungus. a. Avoid wounding ohia trees and roots with mowers, chainsaws, weed eaters, and other tools. Cut only the minimum amount of trees and branches as approved for the project. b. All cutting tools, including machetes, chainsaws, and loppers must be sanitized to remove visible dirt and other contaminants prior to entry into natural areas or areas with native habitat, and when moving to a new project area within the native habitat area. Tools may be sanitized using a solution of >70% isopropyl alcohol or a freshly mixed 10% bleach solution. One minute after sanitizing, you may apply an oil based lubricant to chainsaw chains or other metallic parts to prevent corrosion. c. Only dedicated tools and chainsaws should be used to sample known or suspected ROD infected trees. d. Vehicles, machinery, and equipment must be cleaned as described in (1) above. 5. Imported firewood, logs, and ohia parts: a. Ohia firewood, ohia logs, and ohia parts should not be transported. 6. For individuals working in the field: a. Before going into the field, visually inspect and clean your clothes, boots, pack, radio harness, tools and other personal gear and equipment, for seeds, soil, plant parts, insects, and other debris. A small brush is handy for cleaning boots, equipment and gear. Soles of shoes should be sanitized using a solution of >70% isopropyl alcohol or a freshly mixed 10% bleach solution. Mr. William F. Bow 11 b. Immediately before leaving the field, visually inspect and clean your clothes, boots, pack, radio harness, tools, and other personnel gear and equipment, for seeds, soil, plant parts, insects, and other debris. Soles of shoes should be sanitized using a solution of >70% isopropyl alcohol or a freshly mixed 10% bleach solution. c. Little fire ants nest in trees. If you are under a tree and that tree is bumped or somehow stressed, the threat response of the ants is to fall from the leaves and sting the person under the tree. If you are subject to an ant attack, do not panic. The ants are extremely small but their stings are painful so make sure you remove all ants from your body and clothing. The stings cause inch long welts that are itchy and painful, and can last for weeks. Treat stings as you would other insect stings. In some persons stings can produce life threatening reactions. Stocking antihistamine in the first aid kit is a reasonable precaution. d. Rat Lungworm disease is caused by a parasite that can infect humans who consume raw or undercooked infected snails or slugs or consume raw produce that contains a small infected snail or slug. Infection is rare but can be serious. Symptoms can include severe headache, neck stiffness, low grade fever, nausea, and vomiting anywhere from 1-6 weeks after exposure. The disease is not spread person to person. Anyone who handles snails or slugs should wear gloves and/or wash hands. Eating unwashed produce is discouraged. Mr. William F. Bow 12 U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Recommended Standard Best Management Practices The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) recommends the following measures to be incorporated into project planning to avoid or minimize impacts to fish and wildlife resources. Best Management Practices (BMPs) include the incorporation of procedures or materials that may be used to reduce either direct or indirect negative impacts to aquatic habitats that result from project construction -related activities. These BMPs are recommended in addition to, and do not over -ride any terms, conditions, or other recommendations prepared by the USFWS, other federal, state or local agencies. If you have questions concerning these BMPs, please contact the USFWS Aquatic Ecosystems Conservation Program at 808-792-9400. 1. Authorized dredging and filling -related activities that may result in the temporary or permanent loss of aquatic habitats should be designed to avoid indirect, negative impacts to aquatic habitats beyond the planned project area. 2. Dredging/filling in the marine environment should be scheduled to avoid coral spawning and recruitment periods, and sea turtle nesting and hatching periods. Because these periods are variable throughout the Pacific islands, we recommend contacting the relevant local, state, or federal fish and wildlife resource agency for site specific guidance. 3. Turbidity and siltation from project -related work should be minimized and contained within the project area by silt containment devices and curtailing work during flooding or adverse tidal and weather conditions. BMPs should be maintained for the life of the construction period until turbidity and siltation within the project area is stabilized. All project construction -related debris and sediment containment devices should be removed and disposed of at an approved site. 4. All project construction -related materials and equipment (dredges, vessels, backhoes, silt curtains, etc.) to be placed in an aquatic environment should be inspected for pollutants including, but not limited to; marine fouling organisms, grease, oil, etc., and cleaned to remove pollutants prior to use. Project related activities should not result in any debris disposal, non- native species introductions, or attraction of non-native pests to the affected or adjacent aquatic or terrestrial habitats. Implementing both a litter -control plan and a Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point plan (HACCP — see http://www.haccp-nrm.org/Wizard/default. asp) can help to prevent attraction and introduction of non-native species. 5. Project construction -related materials (fill, revetment rock, pipe, etc.) should not be stockpiled in, or in close proximity to aquatic habitats and should be protected from erosion (e.g., with filter fabric, etc.), to prevent materials from being carried into waters by wind, rain, or high surf. 6. Fueling of project -related vehicles and equipment should take place away from the aquatic environment and a contingency plan to control petroleum products accidentally spilled during the project should be developed. The plan should be retained on site with the person responsible for compliance with the plan. Absorbent pads and containment booms should be stored on -site to facilitate the clean-up of accidental petroleum releases. Mr. William F. Bow 13 7. All deliberately exposed soil or under -layer materials used in the project near water should be protected from erosion and stabilized as soon as possible with geotextile, filter fabric or native or non-invasive vegetation matting, hydro -seeding, etc. Letter SA2 Standard Comments for Land Use Reviews Clean Air Branch Hawaii State Department of Health If your proposed project: Requires an Air Pollution Control Permit You must obtain an air pollution control permit from the Clean Air Branch and comply with all applicable conditions and requirements. If you do not know if you need an air pollution control permit, please contact the Permitting Section of the Clean Air Branch. s Includes construction or demolition activities that involve asbestos You must contact the Asbestos Abatement Office in the Indoor and Radiological Health Branch. Has the potential to generate fugitive dust You must control the generation of all airborne, visible fugitive dust. Note that construction activities that occur near to existing residences, business, public areas and major thoroughfares exacerbate potential dust concerns. It is recommended that a dust control management plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all activities that may generate airborne, visible fugitive dust. The plan, which does not require Department of Health approval, should help you recognize and minimize potential airborne, visible fugitive dust problems. Construction activities must comply with the provisions of Hawaii Administrative Rules, §11- 60.1-33 on Fugitive Dust. In addition, for cases involving mixed land use, we strongly recommend that buffer zones be established, wherever possible, in order to alleviate potential nuisance complaints. You should provide reasonable measures to control airborne, visible fugitive dust from the road areas and during the various phases of construction. These measures include, but are not limited to, the following: a) Planning the different phases of construction, focusing on minimizing the amount of airborne, visible fugitive dust -generating materials and activities, centralizing on -site vehicular traffic routes, and locating potential dust -generating equipment in areas of the least impact; b) Providing an adequate water source at the site prior to start-up of construction activities; c) Landscaping and providing rapid covering of bare areas, including slopes, starting from the initial grading phase; d) Minimizing airborne, visible fugitive dust from shoulders and access roads; e) Providing reasonable dust control measures during weekends, after hours, and prior to daily start-up of construction activities; and f) Controlling airborne, visible fugitive dust from debris being hauled away from the project site. If you have questions about fugitive dust, please contact the Enforcement Section of the Clean Air Branch Clean Air Branch Indoor Radiological Health Branch (808) 586-4200 (808) 586-4700 cab doh.hawaii. ov April 1, 2019 Letter SA3 DAVID Y. IGE GOVERNOR "o r JADE T. BUTAY DIRECTOR Deputy Directors LYNN A.S. ARAKI-REGAN 4 DEREKJ.CHOW ROSS M. HIGASHI EDWIN H. SNIFFEN STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLY REFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION DIR 0756 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET STP 8.3001 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813-5097 August 19, 2020 Mr. William F. Bow, M.S. Environmental Director Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Dear Mr. Bow: Subject: Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) Chapter 343, Hawaii Revised Statutes Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvements South Kona, Hawaii Tax Map Key: (3) 8-9-004:001 The Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) has reviewed the subject DEA and understands the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation is proposing to improve the Milolii Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Based on the project description and location, it appears the project will have no significant impacts to State highway facilities; therefore, HDOT has no comments. If there are any questions, please contact Mr. Blayne Nikaido of the HDOT Statewide Transportation Planning Office at (808) 831-7979 or via email at blayne.h.nikaido@hawaii.gov. SincereI JADE T. BUTAY Director of Transportation Letter SA4 'Hawes t see l e September 3, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai `i 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, In light of the recent outbreak of COVID-19 in the Miloli`i Fishing Village in South Kona, We strongly urge the Department of Parks and Recreation to extend or postpone the September 8, 2020 deadline to submit comments on the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project, so that the community can focus on the health crisis they are currently facing. We also want to convey our concerns regarding community engagement for this project. Two community meetings were held and a third was also to be scheduled but was never done. Therefore, there are many unanswered questions remaining that should be addressed. This community is currently dealing with a COVID-19 outbreak and with the added burden of the looming deadline for comments on the proposed project and EA, it is adding to the emotional stress in this community. As you are aware, COVID-19 has greatly impacted all aspects of our lives and this request to extend or postpone the upcoming September 8, 2020 deadline for comments, is not an unreasonable request. Our suggestion would be to delay the comment period two months to November 8, 2020. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808-586-6760 or senkkahele(a capitol.hawaii.gov. Sincerely, Senator Kaiali`i Kahele Senator Dru Mamo Kanuha Representative Richard P. Creagan cc: Roxcie Waltjen, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Keith Kawaoka, Acting Director, Department of Health, Office of Environmental Quality Control Suzanne Case, Chair, Department of Land and Natural Resources Letter SA5 (lawai i State legidat u-e November 9, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai `i 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project, Republished Draft Environmental Assessment (AFNSI) Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to convey the following concerns regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project -Republished Draft Environmental Assessment (EA) (AFNSI). As you are aware, there were two community meetings held, but since the third was never scheduled, there remains many unanswered questions that should be addressed. Unfortunately, they have not been adequately addressed in the current Draft EA. It is not clear from the language in the Draft EA whether a Conservation District Use SA5-A Permit (CDUP) will be required or not. Where required to list other required permits and approvals, the Draft EA only lists "numerous." In the project summary, despite identifying that the project takes place within a conservation district, the report fails to acknowledge that a CDUP will be required. In the consultation letter received from the Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, OCCL notes that a Site Plan Approval application is required. 2. Additionally, in the Project Summary, the report states that the "use of state lands and SA5-B state funds; use of conservation district" serve as the HRS §343 trigger. Therefore, should the final approving agency be the Board of Land and Natural Resources (BLNR)? The consultation letter from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineer, Honolulu District also SA5-C questions whether or not there is a federal nexus on this project. I also request clarification as to whether or not this project will require a Department of the Army authorization. 4. An archaeological inventory survey was performed, but it appears from the AIS that there was no prior consultation on the AIS testing strategy with the State Historic Preservation SA5-D Division as required under the HAR and there was no consultation with the area practitioners who consider the sites identified significant. I and the community feel the Mr. Jeffrey Ochi November 9, 2020 Page 2 proposed development could have severe impacts to the terrain and the sub surface terrain. We do not know if there are any archaeological sites at the beach park location (burials) etc., and an additional investigation and proper consultation would have resolved this issue. 5. The State and County of Hawaii (COH) are obligated to identify traditional and customary practices in the area and identify potential impacts to those activities. This is SA5-E entirely absent from the current Draft EA. 6. On page 1 (1.1) it is stated that the COH is improving the Miloli`i Beach Park to "increase recreational access for visitors to the beach park." However, every family I SA5-F have talked to in Miloli`i does not want increased access for visitors. The beach park already experiences a high amount of visitors that come to the park and leave their cars to walk to Honomalino Bay. Has the COH done a traffic study? What is it doing to improve road access and safety with the increase in vehicles. There is a limited amount of space at the Miloli`i Beach Park and increasing visitor access should not be a priority. 7. The current pavilion is unpermitted but the COH (under former County Councilwoman Keiko Bonk) provided the funding to build the pavilion and allowed the pavilion to be SA5-G built without a permit. Many kupuna and members of the community built the pavilion with hard work and sweat equity. What the COH should do is make improvements to the existing structure and utilize the "as built" permit process. Not tear down the existing pavilion. 8. The proposed improvements will dramatically alter the existing character of the Miloli`i SA5-H Beach Park, not maintain it. 9. On page 2, 1.3 - "The proposed action would use state funding." What was the amount of State funding allocated for this project? In what legislative session was this funding SA5-I appropriated? Is this capital improvement project (CIP) funding appropriated to the COH Parks and Recreation? Please provide more details on the State funding source. If State funding is being used, I would strongly encourage an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) be performed. 10. On page 48, the Draft EA states that there was "overall positive feedback from the community." This is not an accurate statement. I spoke to many families in Milol11 - SA5-J Village the last few weeks and many do not support the full renovation being proposed. Almost all did agree that limited improvements need to happen to the bathrooms and pavilion to bring the facilities up to County code standards and that ADA compliance is necessary, but not at the expense that is being currently proposed. 11. Only two meetings were held in Miloli`i for community input. The first had very little community notice and as a result only 9 attended. The second meeting had a much larger SA5-K turnout but that was still not enough community input. A third meeting was also promised but never materialized. Rather than coming to Miloli`i to tell the community Mr. Jeffrey Ochi November 9, 2020 Page 3 what the COH is proposing to do, the COH should work with the community and ask them for their thoughts on what should be done at the Miloli`i Beach Park. 12. Fishermen have expressed their concerns with the lack of room to turn their boats around. More consultation needs to happen with the active fishermen of Miloli`i around the SA5-L design of the beach park and the turn around radius and requirements needed for the various sizes of boats that launch from the Miloli`i boat ramp. I strongly feel that this project requires an EIS to fully identify all the potential impacts. I urge you to revise and resubmit this assessment through the EIS process, identifying the proper accepting SA5-M authority and resolving the issues identified above. It should be anticipated that if this inadequate assessment proceeds to a FEATONSI, it may be challenged pursuant to applicable laws and regulations. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at senkkahele(a capitol.hawaii.gov or 808-586-6760. Me ka ha`aha`a, Kaiali`i Kahele Senate District 1 — Hilo cc: Roxcie Waltjen, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Keith Kawaoka, Acting Director, Department of Health, Office of Environmental Quality Control Suzanne Case, Chair, Department of Land and Natural Resources Samuel J. Lemmo, Administrator, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands Letter SA6 From: Kamakana Ferreira <kamakanaf@oha.org> Sent: Monday, November 9, 2020 2:37 PM To: jeffrey.ochi@hawaiicounty.gov Cc: Korey Johnson Subject: OHA Comments Re: DEA Miloli'i Beach Park ADA Improvements Project Aloha Mr. Ochi, Below are comments from the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) regarding the July 2020 draft environmental assessment (DEA) for the proposed Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project in South Kona, Hawai'i Island, recently released for public comment on October 8. Bow Engineering & Development, Inc., has prepared the DEA on behalf of the County of Hawai'i, Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR), pursuant to Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) 343. The proposed action will mostly include improvements to the existing Miloli'i Beach Park buildings and amenities to comply with current Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) guidelines. Non-ADA improvements will further include: restructuring and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball court; designation of a boat turnaround area; and, the installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline. OHA's comments pertain to HRS 6E (historic preservation review) compliance and cultural resources. These comments will also be provided in a formal letter. HRS 6E Compliance While the DEA indicates that an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) report was completed for this SA6-A project in 2019, the AIS included in the DEA as Appendix B is labeled as a "draft" and language within the DEA seems to imply that consultation with the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) is not yet complete. The DEA simply states, "SHPD consultation has been initiated." Thus, it appears SHPD has not actually reviewed the AIS for compliance with the existing rules pursuant to HRS 6E and that the historic preservation review process is still on -going. Notably, the AIS appears to be missing a few required items: 1) a map showing the areal extent of prior archaeological work in the area as required by HAR 13-276-5(c)(2)(A);�'l and, 2) a plan view map for each identified historic property as required by HAR 13-276-5(d)(4)(F)Yl Also, it is concerning and misleading that the DEA indicates limited subsurface testing was done while the AIS says that no subsurface testing occurred. Furthermore, there seems to be limited and outdated information regarding the subsurface soil composition in the AIS report. The AIS cites a 1973 soil survey as reason to conclude the "soil in the project area is comprised of rough broken land," and characterized by "20 to 60+ inches of undefined soils". Yet, the DEA section on geology, which references a 2018 soil report by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, indicates the soils in Miloli'i are classified as "Punaluu-Lava flows complex' with "organic material over Pahoehoe". If the subsurface composition is unknown, subsurface testing may in fact be M The AIS indicates "Figure 13" is a map showing the extent of prior archaeological studies; however, Figure 13 contains a photograph of Hau`oli Kamana`o Church. The referenced areal map could not be find in any other figures throughout the document. [2J The AIS does include a singular locational map of the three identified sites in Figure 25 that was provided by Bow Engineering & Development, Inc.. However, the rules require a plan view map for each identified site to be generated by (or under the supervision of) a qualified archaeologist and a description of the methods used to generate the map. It is unclear if Bow Engineering & Development, Inc., has qualified archaeological staff to generate the plan view map and there is no explanation detailing how the map was made. warranted and recommended by SHPD. Concerning to OHA in this regard is that the AIS mentions burials just north of the project area at the "old a'a flow' over former Ho'opuloa Village and there is no comparative discussion on subsurface characteristics to help determine a likelihood of encountering more burials. Commonly, burials are often found in shoreline areas and lava tubes on Hawai'i Island. Without further explanation, subsurface testing may be the only means to better understand the subsurface domain. This point further stresses the importance of needing SHPD comment, as they could conclude subsurface testing is in fact needed in this case. Procedurally, OHA maintains that completing the HRS 6E review after the DEA robs the HRS 343 process of the intent to fully consider environmental impacts and contradicts what is required by Hawai'i Administrative Rules (HAR) 11-200.1. The intent of HRS Chapter 343 is to ensure a project's impact to the environment is fully considered in the planning process and to integrate mitigation where needed to minimize significant environmental harm. HAR 11-200.1-18(d)(8) requires that proposed mitigations be included within the DEA. In determining whether historic properties will be adversely impacted, the HRS 6E review process is essential to identifying sites and generating mitigation commitments in consultation with SHPD. Typically, any resulting mitigations made during the HRS 6E review process are included in the DEA. If recommended mitigations or additional testing work is requested by SHPD at a later time, the DEA cannot possibly be complete as required by the HARs. OHA thus questions the completeness of the DEA and the FONSI determination. Deferring the HRS 6E review process at this point hides possible adverse impacts and mitigations from being included in the DEA, thus skewing the FONSI determination and limiting the public's chance to comment. The precedence set by this decision would go against the way DEA's are typically done in the State of Hawai'i and potentially encourage other projects to do HRS 6E reviews after a DEA is complete. OHA cannot support this course action. Cultural Resources In review of the DEA, it appears that there has been no dedicated cultural impact assessment (CIA) SA6-B performed for this project. The only reference to cultural practices within the DEA is under the "consultation" sub -section within Section 3.5. Here, it states that oral history interviews were conducted in 2003 for a different project in Miloli'i to better understand traditional fishing practices of the region. While the results indicated a decline in the abundance of fish and overall fishery quality, the DEA states there is no specific information regarding the project site. Suggested mitigations, which included designating Sunday as no fishing days to aid in fish population recovery and limiting the use of "foreign baits," were provided in the AIS. However, the DEA makes no mention of these suggested mitigations and concludes that the exercise of traditional Native Hawaiian rights and customary activities will not be affected. Members of the Kaupiko 'ohana and other beneficiaries from the area have reported to OHA that they do have concerns about how improvements will affect fisherman that use the area and potential overcrowding of the area that could affect familial and cultural practitioner access. While these beneficiaries reported that there was a community meeting hosted by DPR to discuss the project earlier this year, they feel their concerns regarding project impacts to cultural practices and access were ignored. They have further expressed that they were not specifically consulted about cultural practices occurring in the area and there was never any follow up to the concerns they raised. OHA believes the age of the prior consultation work done in 2003 and the targeted subject matter is not adequate to assess impacts to cultural resources. More importunately, there is no CIA to accompany the IDEA as required by Act 50, Session Laws of Hawai'i 2000, for any environmental assessment in the State of Hawai'i. While recent amendments to the HARs that govern environmental rules do allow for prior analyses that were included in prior DEAs to be used again in different projects,�31 the oral history study from 2003 is not a CIA. Furthermore, a lot could have changed in the 18 years since the study. As evident in the expressed concerns of our beneficiaries, there are clearly individuals and 'ohana that believe cultural practices are occurring. Guidelines for assessing cultural impacts are provided by the Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) in the Guide to Implementation and Practice of the Hawaii Environmental Policy Act, Exhibit 1-1, 2012 Edition. We encourage DPR to complete a CIA that is compliant with these guidelines and minimally reach out to the Kaupiko 'ohana and other individuals they recommend. OHA would further like to remind the DPR that as a County agency, DPR has a responsibility to reasonably protect traditional and customary Native Hawaiian rights as required by Articles IX and XII of the State of Hawai'i Constitution. Article XII Section 7 of the State of Hawai'i Constitution states: "the State reaffirms and shall protect all rights, customarily and traditionally exercised for subsistence, cultural and religious purposes and possessed by ahupua'a tenants who are descendants of native Hawaiians who inhabited the Hawaiian Islands prior to 1778..." In Ka Pa'akai O Ka 'Aina v. Land Use Commission, 94 Haw. 31 (2000), hereinafter Ka Pa'akai, the Hawai'i Supreme Court, reiterated the importance of Section 7 and reaffirmed that the State and its agencies, inclusive of the Counties, are obligated to reasonably protect the traditional and customary rights of Hawaiians. The Ka Pa'akai court decision set forth that a proper analysis of cultural impacts shall include: 1) the identity and scope of valued cultural, historical, or natural resources in the subject area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised; 2) the extent to which those resources — including traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights — will be affected or impaired by the proposed action; and, 3) the feasible action, if any, to be taken by the (agency) to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights if they are found to exist. While the construct for CIAs have often been used to satisfy these Ka Pa'akai requirements, there is no dedicated CIA for this particular project and no means to justify that the DPR has adequately assessed the occurrence of traditional and customary Native Hawaiian practices. Closing Remarks Mahalo for the opportunity to comment. OHA looks forward to seeing our comments pertaining to HRS 6E compliance and cultural resources addressed. More importantly, we hope the voices of Native Hawaiians are heard and identified cultural practices are protected. Miloli'i is an important cultural kipuka and one of the last vestiges of an important Hawaiian cultural landscape and native tenant system that requires the utmost consideration and protection as urban sprawl continues to threaten these important cultural communities. Should you have any questions, please contact OHA's Lead Compliance Specialist, Kamakana C. Ferreira at (808) 594-0227 or by email at kamakanaf@oha.org. P] See HAR 11-200.1-12, Consideration of previous determinations and accepted statements. Mahalo, Xamakana C. Ferreira, -%I.A Lead Compliance Specialist Office of Hawaiian Affairs 560 N. Nimitz Hwy Honolulu, Hi. 96817 (808)594-0227 Letter IND1 Shirley Casuga November 9", 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I oppose the Draft EA submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii. I would like to suggest that the park be left alone. One of the main reasons I oppose the IND1-A renovations is because it will increase my land taxes. I currently pay $900.00 every six months, $1,800.00 every year. Another request is that I am also asking is for less camping permits in the IND1-B park. The upgrades that are being suggested is still not intended for our community, the park will IND1-C be upgraded for the tourist and visitors. I would like to suggest that the Park and Recreation work with the community to upgrade the halau/pavilion. The park ADA upgrades need to be discussed IND1-D and planed with our community. Finally, the bathrooms should have sufficient stalls to accommodate our community. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.937.7073 or 808.328.9780 Sincerely, Shirley Casuga cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. The Environmental Notice dated October 8, 2020 at page 3: htt2://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/The Environmental Notice/2020-10-08-TEN.pdf Letter IND2 Ben and Darlene Casuga Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I oppose the Draft EA submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii. IND2-A I would like to suggest that the park be left alone and more so changing the overall landscape with lose the true intent of the park. Another request is that I am also asking for less camping IND2-B permits in the park. The upgrades that are being suggested is not intended for our community, the park will be upgraded for the outsiders which include tourist and visitors. I would like to suggest IND2-C that Parks and Recreation work with the community to upgrade the pavilion, with the draft EA the park will attract more people and it will have an adverse reaction to this traditional place. We IND2-A suggest that your officers continue to talk to our families as you continue this process. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.345.6452 or 808.756.0288 Sincerely, Ben and Darlene Casuga cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Letter IND3 Ka' imi N. Kaupiko 89-1831 Milolii Rd. Captain Cook, HI 96704 November 3, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I am opposed to the Draft Environmental Assessment that was completed. I am a resident of Milolii and attended two community meetings held by you and the Department of Park and Recreation. I am opposed because some of our comments and concerns were not addressed after those meetings. A few of the concerns I want to discuss today is in regards to the main Pavilion, the camping permits, the parking lot and bathrooms. I did not hear back from you regarding our community meeting a few months and I am worried that what is written in your Draft EA is not the full intent of many of our community members. In our meetings we expressed that we wanted the Miloli' i park to stay as authentic as possible with minimum upgrades to comply with the American with Disability Act. However, we realized that you did not listen to some of our concern. The first concern I want to bring up is the exiting park pavilion. We were hoping you could renovate the current pavilion but according IND3-A to your proposal you will build a new building. My concern is that the moving of the building will cause a problem for the many fisherman who need to turn around at the park. I would IND3-B suggest we need a bigger turnaround then the one proposed. Second, I want to ask about the camping permits, many of the villagers raised concerned that the visitor's camping needs to be reduced to less permits, your current proposal asks for 50 permits. I suggest 10-15 permits IND3-C maximum. Third I am worried that the parking lot will need more stalls to accommodate our families and the amount of spaces might cause a congestion with the current flow of residents and visitors. Finally, I would like to make it clear that the intent of these upgrades beyond complying to make it ADA accessible, is that the park serves the needs of its residents and not IND3-D visitors. November 3, 2020 Page 2 On a positive note, I am content that you considered to leave the bathrooms in its current location, but I would like to know if the leech fields and other issues with the septic is addressed IND3-E so there will be no pollution as well as the bathroom stalls, I am hoping to have at least two stalls in each bathroom. I am also supportive of the resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball court. IND34 However, I am hoping we can suggest that the court be more user friendly to the needs of the youths. A multi -use facility that has indoor and outdoor features. Since you are taking down a IND3-G few ironwood trees we are hoping that you consider creating shade for the court as well as the IND3-H playground facility. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.937.1310 or kkaupiko@gmail.com Sincerely, Ka'imi N. Kaupiko cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Letter IND4 Ka' imi N. Kaupiko 89-1831 Milolii Rd. Captain Cook, HI 96704 November 3, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I am opposed to the Draft Environmental Assessment that was completed. I am a resident of Milolii and attended two community meetings held by you and the Department of Park and Recreation. I am opposed because some of our comments and concerns were not addressed after those meetings. A few of the concerns I want to discuss today is in regards to the main Pavilion, the camping permits, the parking lot and bathrooms. I did not hear back from you regarding our community meeting a few months and I am worried that what is written in your Draft EA is not the full intent of many of our community members. In our meetings we expressed that we wanted the Miloli' i park to stay as authentic as possible with minimum upgrades to comply with the American with Disability Act. However, we realized that you did listen to some of our concern. The first concern I want to bring up is the exiting park pavilion. We were hoping you could renovate the current pavilion but according to your proposal you will build a new building. My concern is that the moving of the building will cause a problem for the many fisherman who need to turn around at the park. I would suggest we need a bigger turnaround then the one proposed. Second, I want to ask about the camping permits, many of the villagers raised concerned that the visitor's camping needs to be reduced to less permits, your current proposal asks for 50 permits. I suggest 10-15 permits maximum. Third I am worried that the parking lot will need more stalls to accommodate our families and the amount of spaces might cause a congestion with the current flow of residents and visitors. Finally, I would like to make it clear that the intent of these upgrades beyond complying to make it ADA accessible, is that the park serves the needs of its residents and not visitors. November 4, 2020 Page 2 On a positive note, I am content that you considered to leave the bathrooms in its current location, but I would like to know if the leech fields and other issues with the septic is addressed so there will be no pollution as well as the bathroom stalls, I am hoping to have at least two stalls in each bathroom. I am also supportive of the resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball court. However, I am hoping we can suggest that the court be more user friendly to the needs of the youths. A multi -use facility that has indoor and outdoor features. Since you are taking down a few ironwood trees we are hoping that you consider creating shade for the court as well as the playground facility. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.937.1310 or kkaupiko@gmail.com Sincerely, '�/' f �_ Ka'imi'N. Kaupiko cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Letter IND5 Wilfred Kaupiko 89-1196 Mamalahoa Hwy. Captain Cook, HI 96704 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFN@. I am currently opposed to the Draft EA submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii. I would like to suggest that the park and recreation continues to communicate IND5-A with the community to mitigate any differences or concerns regarding these ADA upgrades. The outreaches conducted by the Park and Recreation was not fully supported as noted in the Draft EA. One of the main reasons I oppose the renovation is that it will not adhere to the true intent of IND5-B the village. Milolii is known throughout Hawaii as a traditional fishing village, one that continued to honor the ways of our past and preserve it for the future. I am also asking that a IND5-C Cultural Impact Statement take place to honor our traditional ways. The upgrades that are being suggested is still not intended for our community, the park will be upgraded for the tourist and IND5-B visitors as noted in your Draft EA. The upgrades or renovations should first honor the community who uses and occupies the space. I also would like to suggest that the Park and Recreation work with the community to upgrade the halau/pavilion versus move ahead with the plans as presented in the Draft EA. Finally, the park ADA upgrades need to be discussed and IND5-A planed with fully with our community. With that, I submit this testimony opposing the current draft EA until these concerns and differences between the county Parks and Recreation be discussed and mitigated, If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.896.6272 or hawaiianrolloffservices@gmail.com Sincerely, Wil red Kaupiko cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Letter IND6 Leillynne Kaupu 89-1767 Miloli'i Road Captain Cook, HL 96704 November 8, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai `i 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). First off I want to mention, I attended one of the 2 meetings that took place in the village, only because I didn't find out till after your first meeting that the County had plans to renovate our park. So lack of communication falls on you folks first of all. I, and like a lot of the ohana here in the village, come from a line of generational fishermans that were born and bred from Miloli'i. Till today I continue to carry this tradition and teach this way of life to my child. I, Leillynne Kaupu, oppose the Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvements Project and for a few reasons. Let me explain, According to your DEA page 48 Section 6.1 Early Consultation Line 20 it mentions IND6-A "There was overall positive feedback from the community." This I am going to disagree with. I was at that meeting and yes there was feedback, but not so much positive feedback. I believe it was our kupuna and most of the members that attended that Nov 3rd meeting, said to the 2 reps to "leave the pavilion alone. Just leave things alone." a. With less than a month between the 2 meetings, preparations were less than adequate. Communication throughout the community from the County was lacking. b. From this November 3rd meeting we were promised another meeting from the reps but never got one. Instead a public notice went out stating the new Republished DEA without another community meeting. Now we only have this time to send in comments. 2. We already have limited space for our community, our canoe paddling communities, IND6-B fishermans from near and far, buses that pick our keiki up for school, and large water trucks that haul water to the residence and the parks water storage. The moving of the pavilion closer to the center and additional parking stalls will minimize this space for trucks and trailers to turn their boats around. We are also a paddling community, and the trailers for canoes are larger and longer than boat trailers. At the November 3rd meeting we even had ohana come down with their trucks and trailers to show your reps what we are talking about. 3. As for your proposed plans for allowing 50 camping permits, I am going to have to IND6-C disagree and ask you folks to not allow that to happen. At the 2nd meeting the community and myself expressed that allowing 28-50 camping permitted space is way too much. At this meeting we also mentioned that we would consider only having 8-10 (max 15) permits allowed. Also take into consideration that the new placement of the pavilion and additional parking stalls will not allow space for up to 50 camping permits. If the space the pavilion is currently in, is to provide the space for these permits I do not agree with it. If the building needs to be pushed back due to coastal code regulations then this area should NOT be permitted for camping. 4. Is the comfort station staying as is? The demolishing and rebuilding of the comfort IND6-D station draws concerns. In this proposal you are wanting to limit the gender rooms to only 1 stall. Why, when we currently have 2 stalls for each womens and mens, THIS I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT. How is only having 1 stall per bathroom ADA certified? a. What type of maintenance is being done to take care and make sure the septic system and the leach field is not leaking or contaminating the grounds and surrounding waters? Are these systems contaminating our waters surrounding the park where our keiki's swim and play? This information the community deserves to know and have on hand. b. Also take into consideration that the private property on the south end of the park also has a loko i'a or a nursery for fish. Has there been any testing done to find the results of contaminants leaking into our waters? Before demolishing and rebuilding the comfort station elsewhere, what precautionary matters are you folks considering so as not to harm the environment more than it already is? Page 25 Section 3.9 Social and Economic Characteristic Lines 14-16 it states "The Pa`a IND6-E Pono Miloli`i website estimates that the village of Miloli`i has about 200 residents (Pa`a Pono 2017)" This number has been multiplying through the years and needs an update. Also know that these numbers are of the original descendants of the relocated families from the 1926 lava flow and not of the neighboring communities. Which the population of the surrounding community will have multiplied by 1000 to this date. You could have come and made yourself known if you folks only came out into the community to gather these information yourself instead of going through information dated back in 2017. It's 2020 now and by the time you folks are done with any of this it will be 2022 with an even larger population count. 6. Page 27 Section 3.11 Traffic and Parking Lines 2 & 3 last sentence in paragraph states IND6-F "The project also includes installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion." My question is what kind of barriers will you place and where? There is a house in the ka'u corner of the park that families will need access to. To place a pathway or even a barrier in the ka'u corner of the park will draw concerns to the community and the ohana of the house. Please reconsider your barriers. 7. Positive note, I agree with the resurfacing of the court. Even the possibility of making it IND6-G an indoor/outdoor court with solar lighting. Lighting that will not harm us or the animals IND6-H surrounding the area, and will not pollute our beautiful night skies. We do have keiki workshops down there where we teach them of the night skies constellations, moon phases, and traditional navigation. So too much lighting is not wanted. 8. I also like the idea of the playground facilities, but if you cut down the trees, what will IND6-I shade this area? What will protect the playground facilities from flying balls out of the court area? Will you be rebuilding the fence line and make it taller to keep the kids in the playground area safe? a. In my youth we had a playground of which was removed and not properly IND6-I disposed of but just dumped in a private property on the mauka side of the road leading to the park. During my youth the playground was made of metal and wood. Metal in the sun will cause harm to our keiki. Trust me when I say, Miloli'i gets really hot so rubber, metal, or anything that attracts and holds heat is harmful to the children. b. How about planting more mature native trees that will provide shade for our keiki and hopefully help with the eroding coastline? Or designating this area for a community garden (or any area in the park) with a shaded area and access to the water station for watering plants on a timer. With this the community can continue its subsistence and sustainable way of living provided by the County. Finally, I would like to make it clear that the intent of these upgrades beyond complying to make IND6 J it ADA accessible, is that the park serves the needs of its residents and not visitors. Although, I am convinced all these improvements are being set up to serve visitors and others instead of the residence and the surrounding community that call this area their HOME. It is our home before it's a site to see. To do these planned improvements will only attract more visitors and highlight our place on the map, your sole purpose as a County should be for its local people, not for the money. If you got this far I respectfully mahalo your time and consideration. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (808)313-0107 or via email pohakul2kyahoo.com. Mahalo nui loa, geff mm e Vacua -U%WW Leillynne "Laila" Kaupu cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Leivallyn Kaupu P.O. Box 26 1-16naunau, HI. 96726 (808) 315-6451 lkaupu@gmail.com November 9, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, Letter IND7 I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). 1. How was the portion of land where the current bathrooms are located, acquired by the IND7-A county/state? In what year? 2. This portion of land is in Grant 43079 (Omoka`a owners John K. & Nancy K. Apo Estate) Tax Map Key 43-8-9-003-006. 3. Why is the need for four handicap stalls when two will suffice. (Majority, handicapable, visitors). IND7-B 4. Why 12 parking stalls'? Visitors, majority of them, park their cars at the park and walk over to the IND7-C black sand beach of Honomalino for the day. Are these parking stalls to accommodate these people or for those who come to the park for luncheon/picnic, swimming in the pond that is there, go pole fishing in front of the park, etc. 5. How wide will there be playground equipment for children to play on at the playground? Will it IND7-D be fenced in due to the fact that it is next to the basketball court and children can get hurt by flying basketballs, etc. 5. Will water quality testing be done regularly on a monthly basis to check if any problems should IND7-E occur, due to leakage of the septic system, etc. 7. The boat turnaround area is not feasible. School bus, water trucks, trucks/boat/trailer/canoes will IND7-C have a hard maneuvering in a small area. S. Who are we (Community of Miloli`i) accommodating'? The visitors or the community'?!'? IND7-F 9. Minimize the amount of changes and improvements to the park as possible. IND7-G 10. Where will construction waste be taken? (i.e., fencing, lumber, etc.) Past "park improvements" made by the county, left an abundant amount of waste and trash matter (i.e., iron playground equipment), which was then placed towards the back of the park, on private property. 11. More picnic tables are needed. IND7-H 12. Solar lighting over court would benefit the community. It will allow community members to play IND74 and utilize the basketball court at night for community gatherings and sporting events. This will encourage the local community to create fun filled activities for all ages that will definitely have a positive impact on the health of everyone. 13. Our marine resources need to be number one on the agenda for resource protection. An increase IND7-J in visitors who lack the knowledge and importance of Miloli`i and it's current efforts made by community members to protect/preserve our marine resources will only damage the only resource we, as native/local community members, thrive on. Signage with current marine habitat and August 7, 2020 Page 2 traditional practices is highly encouraged. Please work with current community families and non-profit organizations to establish this. 14. Updated information is highly recommended. I see that most of your "historical/cultural/social" IND7-K accounts are from an outdated Pa`a Pono Miloli`i (non-profit) website. For example, on pg. 25, line 15, it states that, "The Pa`a Pono Miloli`i website estimates that the village of Miloli`i has about 200 residents (Pa`a Pono Miloli`i 2017)." As of March 2020, the village count (native families) has increased and is now estimated between 270-300 residents within the village alone. You must also take into account the increase in the local community, which includes the subdivision just north of Miloli`i and residential lots going up and down the Miloli`i road. There alone are over 200 residents. Therefore, the current estimated residential count is over 500 people. This amount alone will have a great impact on the park. 15. A new pavilion will definitely benefit the community but who will have access to the facilities? IND7-L How will "power" be provided to the pavilion? I, Leivallyn Kaupu, am one of the current keeper -of -the -keys for the current pavilion. I am incharge of the reservation for the pavilion use. Can there be a "Friends of the Park" agreement with at least one of the current non-profit organizations, that will allow control of pavilion usage for community events? (Pa`a Pono Miloli`i, Kalanihale, Miloli`i Solar and Water Board) 16. With the new pavilion, can there be a designated area for an AED Automated External IND7-L Defibrillator? Members of the non-profit, Kalanihale, are certified in First Aid/CPR/AED and can assist with maintenance/management of such equipment. 17. Sea level rise increases the risk of inundation, flooding, storm surges, and coastal erosion. The IND7-M proposed 5 ft. wide accessible concrete walkway that is supposed to accommodate the ADA will only get damaged during the winter season when rough seas occur every year. How will that be maintained and managed? 18. Page 33, in the Draft Environmental Assessment booklet is dedicated to the unique, cultural IND7-N research of a highly recognized and honored historian, Kepa Maly. He interviewed a great amount of kupuna of this area who unfortunately, are no longer here with us today. It is stated on pg. 33 that, "too many people do not respect the ocean and land", "Sites traditionally visited by families, having been developed and/or traditional accesses blocked", and the most predominant one listed is the "Loss of the old Hawaiian system of Konohiki fisheries; adherence to seasons of kapu fisheries." How will this proposed project support and sustain the current cultural lifestyle of its current inhabitant which includes the native and local people, the environment whom we look at as our kupuna of this area, and the future generation? If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (808) 315-6451 or lkaupu@gmail.com. Sincerely, JLe18-,iola Kaupu Leivallyn Kaupu cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. August 7, 2020 Page 3 For information purposes only Jeffrey Ochi's email: ieffrev.ochi(&hawaiicount�:.gov Korey Johnson's address and email: 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A, Honolulu, HI 96826 kiohnsonAbowen in. e�erin c�om The Environmental Notice dated October 8, 2020 at page 3: http:Hoegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/The_ Environmental Notice/2020-10-08-TEN.pdf Letter IND8 Kamla Kuahuia November 9t', 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I oppose the Draft EA submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii. IND8-A I would like to suggest that the park be left alone and is intended for the community of Milolii. I would also like to suggest that the funds be given to the community to take on the renovations of IND8-B the park. Another request is that I am also asking is for less camping permits in the park. The IND8-C park will be upgraded for the tourist and visitors. I would like to suggest that the community upgrade the halau/pavilion. Finally, we suggest that the basketball/volleyball court and the IND8-D intended playground be furthered discussed so that we will be able to fully support. The ADA upgrades need to be further explained and discussed. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.494.0139 Sincerely, Kamla Kuahuia cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. The Environmental Notice dated October 8, 2020 at page 3: htt2://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/The Environmental Notice/2020-10-08-TEN.pdf Letter IND9 From: Melanie Lewis <melandanlewis@gmail.com> Sent: Thursday, August 27, 2020 12:35 PM To: jeffrey.ochi@hawaiicounty.gov; Korey Johnson Subject: Milolii improvements I wanted to express my concern for the plans make major improvements/changes to Milolii Park. I live in the subdivision in Milolii, and many of the residents in Milolii are dear friends. Over IND9-A the years, it has changed so much- Milolii is now in the dreaded "blue tourist book" and now there is a steady stream of lookie-loos driving down there. The last thing that Milolii needs is more traffic. The road down from HWY 11, which is shared with the subdivision, is narrow and winding. It's not made for the traffic it gets now, and certainly more traffic is not good. It's not fair for those in the subdivision or the village to bring increased traffic down Winding, narrow Milolii road. Milolii residents are of Hawaiian descent. It is a pristine, beautiful place, inhabited by people IND9-B who are full of aloha xxl Nd love for the land and sea. Now they have sunburned tourists driving down there, complaining about dogs ( they don't know that they are walking on private property), the trail to Honolamino Beach not being paved, etc. the boat ramp is unimproved IND9-C and residents like it that way! It is not, and should not be, a public access ramp. The people who use it to launch are sustenance fishing, and are very conscious of the health of the beautiful waters and the fishery, and don't over or illegally harvest. The coral on that stretch of shoreline is one of the most pristine and healthy coral beds in the state. Please find another place to do yourimprovements and make easy for the general public to use, and leave Milolii to the Hawaiians. There are plenty of other places that have already been turned into tourist Meccas. Mahalo and much Aloha, Melanie Lewis (808)494-8781 null Letter IND10 Stephanie Llanes-Taetuga November 9", 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Re: Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). I oppose the Draft EA submitted by the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii. IND10-A I would like to suggest that Miloii park does not change the intent of the park and that it continues to be honor the wishes of our community who continues to care for this special place. I IND10-B would like to suggest that the community upgrade the halau/pavilion. Furthermore, that the county of Hawaii park and recreation continues to work with our families to fix and take care of IND10-C the overall park area. Finally, I support the playgrounds upgrades. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808.854.5779 Sincerely, Stephanie Llanes-Taetuga cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. The Environmental Notice dated October 8, 2020 at page 3: htt2://oegc2.doh.hawaii.gov/The Environmental Notice/2020-10-08-TEN.pdf Letter IND11 Uilani Naipo 1267 Auwae Rd Hilo, Hawaii 96720 uilani.naipo@me.com November 8, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Dear Mr. Ochi, I am submitting the following comments to you and consultant, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. in regards to the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project. I thank you and support your departments efforts in providing accessibility upgrades to Miloli`i Park. However, I implore you to exercise caution in considering all the changes you plan to implement. Miloli`i, IND11-A noted as the Last Hawaiian Fishing Village, wishes to maintain its` cultural assets and landscape in a natural traditional manner without unnecessary modifications. As well, I ask that you consider what the function of the park provides for the village as a priority over what the amenities that the park could provide for the general public. I appreciate your response to hearing the request to retain the current IND11-B location of the comfort station and the much needed resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball court. Camping Permits Modifying the park in a manner that promotes increase camping interest IND11-C and allowing greater number of camping permits would benefit the general public while displacing the needs of the people of Miloli`i. The people of Miloli`i should not have to compete with the general public for the use the parks` space in its` own home village. No more than 10 -12 camping permits should be allowed and during the various annual and special community events, no camping permits should be allowed. Miloli`i hosts several self-reliant initiatives that promote education for stewardship of its` natural resources and neighboring coastal communities. Various health and well-being community events are also held for keiki and `ohana. While doing so, Miloli`i hosts it's presenters and participating guests at the park: - Miloli`i `Opelu Project - Miloli`i Lawai`a Camp - Mohala Na Konohiki - Miloli`i Hoe Wa`a Long Distance Regatta - La `ohana - La `Elima - Thanksgiving & Christmas There are (2) annual fishing tournament events that are hosted by `ohana of Miloli`i. These tournaments provide an opportunity for those that do not live in Miloli`i to fishing the waters of the village `ice box`. During these events, event participants are hosted at Miloli`i Park. - Miloli`i Classic Fishing Tournament (hosted by Willie Kaupiko during Labor Day weekend) - Raymond Kuahuia Ho`olako Fishing Tournament (hosted by `ohana Kuahuia) Parking / Turn Around Access It is general practice to make available appropriate parking accesses for INDII-D our kupuna, disabled, and mothers of little ones while at the park. What is of greater importance than paved parking is the ability for fisherman to turn around and maneuver safely within the parks` space. Mau If it is imperative to disassemble and construct a new halau, I would like IND11-E to see the new structure to resemble the current open pillar structure design with `ili`ili ground cover, a kitchen and library/conference room in the same orientation. These aesthetics are inline with landscape of Miloli`i Village and its` function as a halau (a meeting house). With modest homes of Miloli`i, many of which shelter multiple IND11-A generations, the park and halau is an extension of our village homes, like that of a traditional kauhale. I ask that you consider these comments as you move forward in your project. Thank you for receiving my comments. You may contact me if you have any questions. Na`u no Na U`ilani U`ilani Naipo cc: Korey Johnson, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Letter IND12 Melissa -Ann Mahealani (Hua) Waite -Crawford 89-1757 Miloli'i Road Captain Cook, Hawaii 96704 Sunday, November 8, 2020 Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai'i 101 Pauahi St., Suite 6 Hilo, Hawai'i 96720 Re: Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Dear Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project - Republished Draft EA (AFNSI). It appears, that the Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawai'i are not listening to the hearts of the people who live in the Last Fishing Village of Miloli'i, South Kona. We have spoken with heart, passion, and most importantly, TRUTH on Sunday, November 3, 2019. I, Melissa -Ann Mahealani (Hua) Waite -Crawford, DO NOT agree to the Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project, therefore, I am against the Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project — Republished Draft EA (AFNSI)! These are the following reasons: 1. The turn around area for fishermen and school buses, is still too small. Those who are part IND12-A of the planning department for the County of Hawaii needs to go back and do it again. Another reason why it is still to small is because of the planned pavilion your trying to build is now taking up space. 2. The existing pavilion was spoken for by our Kupunas who attended the November 3, 2019 IND12-B meeting, County is NOT to touch the existing pavilion. This tells me, you do not care about what the Miloli'i Village Ohana had to say about your planned pavilion. You are going ahead of yourselves and still putting it up. That is a crap move and you all know it! 3. The comfort station as you call it, needs to be looked at again! Our people of the Village had IND12-C told your two (2) representatives, James Komata and Maurice Messina the deputy director to fix the existing problem by checking and testing the waters. This has been a battle for years with you folks, saying that it is not a problem, and yet our children suffer from rash and hives. It is also harming our marine resources that I and many others are trying to IND12-D protect. What is going to happen when you put up the comfort station? Are you going to fix the problem we are facing now or are you going to cover it up with dirt, then build it. NO, you need to figure out where the leak is, fix that problem, so it no longer harms our children. PONO this first, make it right. 4. It also appears the whole project is more than just to update the park for ADA accessibility. IND12-E You are using this process to build a new pavilion (not wanted by the residence of Miloli'i), and set up the park to serve visitors, instead of its residents. This is NOT PONO! Please realign your hearts and minds to prioritize projects that serve the residence who live in County of Hawaii, not the tourist/visitors who will be here for only a few days to a couple of weeks. Thank you for your time and consideration, if you have taken the time to read through my comments. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at 808-895-4616 or via email, lanihua34@gmail.com. Sincerely, Melissa -Ann (Hua) Waite -Crawford cc: Korey Johnson, Consultant, Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. Letter IND13 From: Imaika Yeaman <imaika.yeaman@gmail.com> Sent: Friday, November 6, 2020 6:20 PM To: jeffrey_ochi@hawaiicounty.gov Cc: Korey Johnson Subject: Re: Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project Mr. Jeffrey Ochi Department of Parks and Recreation, County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi St. Suite 6 Hilo, HI 96720 Re: Miloli'i Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Plan(EA/ AFONSI) Aloha Mr. Ochi, I would like to submit the following comments regarding the planned improvements at Miloli'i Beach Park. I am opposed to the current Environmental Assessment and Finding of No Significant Impact for Milolii Beach Park Accessibility Improvement Project. As a resident and fisherman I have concerns that have been echoed by other members in this community and have not yet been fully addressed. First, the spacing and layout of the parking lot and pavilion/ halau does not serve the needs of the IND13-A residents of this community who are the primary users. I feel that any improvements made should reflect the needs of those who use the park on a weekly, if not daily basis. The new location of the "pavilion" does not give us fishermen enough space to turn around without hitting the side of the building. The turn is already tight with a long trailer. Moving the halau any more will completely impact daily fishing operations. I think the parking lot should be redrawn with more insight from community members. My second concern is the number of camping permits that are being proposed. There is not enough IND13-B room to allow the proposed number of camping permits at this small beach. I suggest 15 or less. How will the increased numbers of visitors impact our small community? How will more visitors affect the trails and beaches down the coast that have no restroom facilities? Will it fall upon residents to educate the increased numbers of visitors of where and where not to safely swim? For Miloli'i and its residents these are significant impacts. Please take these comments into consideration, feel free to contact me at this email if you have any questions. Aloha, Imaikalani Yeaman TABLE: SUMMARY COMMENTS AND RESPONSES Summary Comments and Responses Comment # Date Comment Response DRAFT EA COMMENTS AND RESPONSES State Agencies SAl 10/31/2020 United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), Pacific Islands Fish and Wildlife Office, Michelle Bogardus SAl-A The letter identifies ten listed species in the immediate Section 3.4, Biological Resources, of the Final EA has been updated to vicinity of the project area, and provides recommended incorporate USFWS recommended measures to minimize impacts to measures to avoid and minimize potential project impacts listed species that could occur in the immediate vicinity of the project to listed snecies. area. SA2 undated State of Hawaii, Department of Health, Clean Air Branch SA2-A The letter provides Standard Comments for Land Use As set forth in Section 3.6, ArrQualio and Climate, dust control Reviews relating to: a required Air Pollution Control measures to minimize fugitive dust during construction will be Permit; construction or demolition activities that involve implemented, and all construction work will be in conformance with asbestos; and whether the project has the potential to the air pollution control standards contained in Title 11, Chapter 59, generate fugitive dust. HAR, "Ambient Air Quality Standards," and Chapter 60, "Air Pollution Control," which would minimize air quality emissions. No changes to the EA are necessary. SA3 8/19/2020 State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation, Jade T. Butay SA3-A The letter states that because the project would have no significant impacts to State highway facilities, the Comment noted. No response required. Department has no comments. SA4 9/3/2020 State of Hawaii, State Legislature, Senator Kaiah'i Kahele, Senator Dru Mamo Kanuha, Representative Richard P. Creagan SA4-A The letter urges the Department of Parks and Recreation to Due to concerns regarding adequate opportunities for public extend or postpone the deadline to submit comments on participation during COVID-19, the public comment period was the project from September 8, 2020 to November 6, 2020, extended to 90 days. The Draft EA was published in several issues of due to the effects of Covid-19. The letter also expresses The Environmental Notice, including the August 8, 2020, the September concern regarding community engagement for the project 8, 2020 issue, and the October 8, 2020 issue. Community meetings noting that questions remain following cancellation of a were held at the park on October 18, 2019 and November 3, 2019, third community meeting. and a third community meeting was held on May 16, 2021. See Chapter 6 of the EA for a summary of consultation and meetings regarding the proposed project. SA5 11/9/2020 State of Hawaii, State Legislature, Senator Kaiah'i Kahele SA5-A The letter states that the DEA does not acknowledge that a Section 2.3 of the Draft and Final EA identifies the requirement for a Conservation District Use Permit will be required. Conservation District Use Application Site Plan approval from DLNR, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL). Results of early consultation with OCCL and permit requirements are further explained in Section 3.12 of the Draft and Final EA and the OCCL response letter is included in Appendix A, EarjConsultation Comment Letters. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page 1 SA5-B The letter asks if the Board of Land and Natural Resources The County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation is the should be the final approving agency. proposing agency for the park improvement project. Since the Department of Parks and Recreation is the agency using funds for these park improvements, it is the agency responsible for complying with Section 343-5(a), FIRS. No changes to the EA are necessary. SA5-C The letter also requests clarification as to whether or not Following early consultation with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the project will require authorization by the Department of it was determined that because no work would occur in the water, a the Army. Department of the Army permit would not be required (see Section 3.2, Hydrology and IrlaterQualio of the Draft and Final EA). No changes to the EA are necessary. SA5-D The letter questions whether the State Historic Consultation with the SHPD regarding the AIS was initiated following Preservation Division (SHPD) was consulted regarding the completion of the AIS, and was officially completed in July 2022. The archaeological inventory survey (AIS) as required. The SHPD determined that the AIS report prepared for the project comment states that no consultation with local area satisfied the requirements of HAR Section 13-276-5, and accepted the practitioners was conducted, and that the absence or conclusions found therein. See Appendix B for the SHPD Chapter presence of archaeological sites at the beach park location 6E-8 Historic Preservation Review and a copy of the AIS. The Final is unknown and needs to be resolved. EA Section 3.4 includes additional discussion regarding community consultation and potential impacts to cultural practices and cultural features. As stated in the AIS and the EA, the effects of multiple tsunamis and the historic impacts to the property by the construction and use of the school suggests that no pre -contact archaeological sites or features are likely to be encountered. The EA includes regulatory measures to stop work in the event cultural finds are encountered during construction, and sets forth proper cultural protocols and treatment of the finds. SA5-E The letter states that the DEA does not sufficiently identify The Final EA Section 3.4 includes additional discussion regarding traditional and customary practices in the area, nor does it community consultation and potential impacts to cultural practices identify potential impacts to those activities. and cultural features. The proposed project represents a continuation of existing uses and would not negatively impact access to the shoreline, or affect designated significant historic properties. The County aims to provide ongoing beach park access, including the boat turn -around and access to fishing, during construction and operation of the proposed improvements. SA5-F The letter states that the County of Hawaii (COH) is The proposed ADA improvements would not increase overall access improving the park to increase recreational access, but that to the park, but would improve access for disabled visitors and the park already experiences overuse by those who park existing park users. There would be no direct increase in operational there to walk to Honomalino Bay. The letter asks if a traffic traffic due to implementation of the proposed project. No traffic study study has been completed, and what steps would be taken has been completed as part of the project, nor are there any planned to improve road access and safety with the increase in improvements Miloli`i Road. The County will consider the views vehicles. expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessarv. Page 2 SA5-G The letter states that the COH should make improvements Reconstruction of the existing pavilion was considered in the initial to the existing pavilion rather than demolish it and design consideration meetings. Based on preliminary engineering construct a new one. review, it was determined that the existing pavilion would need a complete onsite engineering assessment, which would include extensive investigation and could entail destructive testing to assess the condition of existing structural components. Further, to meet Planning Department requirements to be located outside of the flood zone, it was determined that existing pavilion must be demolished and a new pavilion constructed in its place. No changes to the EA are necessary. SA5-H The letter states that project would dramatically alter the Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in existing character of the Miloli`i Beach Park. these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. SA5-I The letter requests more specific information regarding the As stated in the EA Section 2.2, the project would be constructed use of state funding for the project, and suggests that if based on funding availability from the state, with estimated state funding is used, an Environmental Impact Statement construction costs of $1.75 million. Preparation of an EIS is required (EIS) should be prepared. when significant adverse effects to the environment are anticipated, not if state funds are used. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA SA5-f The letter questions the assertion in the DEA that there are necessary. Comment is noted. The statement regarding positive feedback from was overall "positive feedback from the community." The the community has been struck from the EA. The County will letter suggests the community agreed that limited consider the views expressed these comments in their review and improvements were necessary, but not to the extent s actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. proposed. SA5-K The letter states that the COH has conducted insufficient community outreach, and that such outreach should allow See response to comment SA4-A. for more interaction and input from community members. SA5-L The letter states that project design for the boat ramp area Comment is noted. The boat tum-around area was discussed during does not adequately consider the tum-around radius and the community meetings for the project. Considering the necessary movements needed for the various sizes of fishing vessels site design elements to make the park ADA accessible, the designated that launch from the boat ramp. boat tum-around area was made as large as possible. Boat trailers are also able to use Milohi Road as part of the tum-around movement. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. SA5-M The letter states that the project should be evaluated with Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in an EIS in order to fully identify all the potential impacts. these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are Page 3 SA6 11/9/2020 State of Hawaii, Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Ka.rrakana Ferreira SA6-A The comments of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) pertain to historic preservation review compliance and See response to Comment SA5-D regarding Chapter 6E consultation cultural resources. Regarding FIRS 6E compliance, the with the SHPD. The County will consider the views expressed these letter states that the AIS is incomplete and in draft form. i comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility The letter also states that the SHPD consultation and review of the AIS has not been completed for compliance improvements project. with FIRS 6E as is required. SA6-13 The letter states that there has been no cultural impact assessment (CIA) performed for the project. The DEA See response to comment SA5-D regarding Chapter 6E consultation includes oral history reviews conducted in 2003 for a with the SHPD. The Final EA Section 3.4 includes additional different project in Miloli`i. However, suggested mitigation discussion regarding community consultation and potential impacts to to aid in fish population recovery from these interviews cultural practices and cultural features. The proposed project were included in the DEA. Members of the local Kaupiko represents a continuation of existing uses and would not negatively `ohana and other beneficiaries have concerns regarding impact access to the shoreline, or affect designated significant historic impacts to fishermen in the area and potential properties. The EA does not include suggested mitigation to aid in fish overcrowding. OHA recommends that the DPR complete population recovery since the proposed accessibility improvements a CIA that is compliant with guidelines of the Office of would not result in an increase in use of these resources. The County Environmental Quality Control. The letter also reminds the aims to provide ongoing beach park access, including the boat tum- DPR of its responsibility to reasonably protect traditional around and access to fishing, during construction of the proposed and customary Native Hawaiian rights as required by improvements. Articles IX and XII of the State of Hawaii Constitution. Private Individuals INDI 11/9/2020 Shirley Casuga, Against the project. INDI-A The letter states that project will increase land taxes. Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. Because the comment does not raise any concerns regarding the content or environmental conclusions of the Draft EA, no changes to the EA are necessary. INDI-B The letter suggests that fewer camping permits be issued in Comment is noted. A maximum of 22 campers per night are currently for the park. allowed with permits. With implementation of the improvements, camping rules and reservations would remain the same as those existing. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. Because the comment does not raise any concerns regarding the content or environmental conclusions of the Draft EA_ no changes to the EA are necessarv. Page 4 INDI-C The letter states that the proposed upgrades would benefit Comment is noted. The Miloh'i Beach Park is an important tourists and visitors rather than the community. community resource. As communicated at the community meetings, the proposed project was initiated to meet the federal mandate for ADA compliance; the project would not make any changes to the existing use of the beach park, and the Halm pavilion would remain under control of the community. The intended use of the park is for the Miloh'i Village community. As stated by the County, when the project is completed, there will be no public announcement in order to keep it as community -oriented and "low-key" as possible. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. Because the comment does not raise any concerns regarding the content or environmental conclusions of the Draft EA, no changes to the EA are necessary. INDI-D The letter suggests that the Department of Parks and Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding Recreation (DPR) work with the community to discuss community consultation. The County will consider the views upgrades to the halm/pavilion and ADA compliance expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the features. proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND2 undated Ben and Darlene Casuga, Against the project. IND2-A The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. The letter community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the also states that the proposed upgrades would benefit views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the tourists and visitors rather than the community. proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA IND2-B are necessary. The letter suggests that fewer camping permits be issued in Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-B regarding for the park. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are IND2-C The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halm/pavilion and ADA community consultation. The County will consider the views compliance features. expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND3 11/3/2020 Ka'imi N. Kaupiko, Against the project. IND3-A The letter suggests renovation of the existing pavilion Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-G regarding rather than construction of a new building. reconstruction of the pavilion. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page 5 IND3-B The letter states that the proposed additional parking areas Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-L regarding the would cause congestion; the project could cause traffic and necessary site design elements and congestion. The County will parking issues for fishermen due to the tight turn -around consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and area. actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND3-C The letter states that the proposed number of camping Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-B regarding permits is excessive. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND3-D The letter states that the proposed upgrades would benefit Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding tourists and visitors rather than the community. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND3-E The letter expresses concerns with septic fields associated Comment is noted. Water Quality testing was conducted at five with existing bathrooms, and requests more bathroom different locations at Miloli`i Beach Park at high and low tides between stalls than proposed with the project. March 9, 2020 and March 11, 2020 as part of the IWS Assessment and Feasibility Study for the project (see Appendix D of the Final EA). In general, the waters surrounding Miloli`i Beach Park are being negatively impacted by enterococcus. However, based on water sampling locations and the results of a dye test it does not appear to be resulting from the beach park septic system. See Section 3.2 and Appendix D of the Final EA for additional discussion. IND3-F The letter indicates support for the resurfacing of the Comment noted. volleyball/basketball court. IND3-G The letter suggests that the project include a multi -use Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in facility with indoor and outdoor features. these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND3-H The letter expresses concerns with the proposed Comments is noted. It is anticipated that two trees would be removed playground area in regard to adequate shade. with construction of the proposed improvements. Both the playground area and the basketball court include 6-foot fences for child safety. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND4 11/3/2020 Ka`imi N. Kaupiko IND4-A This letter appears to be a duplicate of IND3. See responses to comment IND3. Page 6 IND5 undated Wilfred Kaupiko, Against the project. IND5-A The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halau/pavilion and ADA community consultation. The County will consider the views compliance features. expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND5-B The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. The letter community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the also states that the proposed upgrades would benefit views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the tourists and visitors rather than the community. proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND5-C The letter suggests that a Cultural Impact Statement take Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-E and SA6-13 place. regarding community consultation and potential impacts to cultural practices and cultural features. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. IND6 11/8/2020 Leillynne Kaupu, Against the project. IND6-A The letter states that communication from the County to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding community residents has been insufficient and inconsistent. community consultation. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. IND6-B The letter states that relocation of the pavilion and the Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-L regarding the proposed additional parking areas would cause congestion; necessary site design elements and congestion. The County will the project could cause traffic and parking issues for consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and fishermen due to the tight turn -around area. actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND6-C The letter states that the proposed number of camping Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-13 regarding permits is excessive. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND6-D The letter expresses concerns with water quality Comment is noted. See response to comment IND3-E regarding water contamination from septic fields associated with existing quality testing. The County will consider the views expressed in these bathrooms, and requests more bathroom stalls than comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility proposed with the project. improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND6-E The letter states that the community population estimate Comment is noted. The community population estimate has been based on 2017 data is not accurate. updated in Section 3.9 of the EA with the best available information. IND6-F The letter expresses concerns with the proposed vehicular Comments is noted. The barriers would be constructed of concrete barriers. and would not restrict access to the existing residence. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page 7 IND6-G The letter indicates support for the resurfacing of the Comment noted. volleyball/basketball court. IND6-H The letter indicates support for the use of solar lighting. Comment noted. IND6-I The letter expresses concerns with the proposed Comments is noted. See response to comment IND3-H regarding playground area in regard to adequate shade and child shade trees. The County will consider the views expressed in these safety. comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND6-f The letter states that the proposed upgrades would benefit Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding tourists and visitors rather than the community. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7 11/9/2020 Leivallyn Kaupu, Against the project. IND7-A The letter asks when the land where the bathrooms are As stated in the EA, the project area was set aside as a public park as located were acquired by the county/state. The comment early as 1931 by the territorial governor. Officially, the Miloli`i Beach states the portion of land where the bathrooms are located Park was created by Executive Order 2435 and has been under the are in Grant #3079, and Tax Map Key #3-8-9-003-006. management of the County of Hawaii since 1985. According to project surveys and CIS information, the project site is located on TMK (3) 8-9-004:001. Additional comments are noted. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. IND7-B The letter suggests that four handicapped bathroom stalls Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in are more than are needed. these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-C The letter states that the proposed additional parking areas Comment is noted. Parking needs were determined by the Department would cause congestion; the project could cause traffic and of Planning and Permitting. See response to comment SA5-L parking issues for fishermen due to the tight turn -around regarding the necessary site design elements and congestion. The area. County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-D The letter expresses concerns with the proposed Comments is noted. See response to comment IND3-H regarding playground area in regard to child safety. shade trees and child safety. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-E The letter expresses concerns with septic fields associated Comment is noted. There are no current plans for the County to with existing bathrooms, and requests more bathroom complete monthly water quality testing. See response to comment stalls than proposed with the project. The letter requests IND3-E regarding water quality testing completed for the project water quality on a monthly basis. evaluation. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. Page 8 IND7-F The letter states that the proposed upgrades would benefit Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding tourists and visitors rather than the community. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-G The letter requests minimizing the extent of changes to the Comment is noted. Excavated materials from construction would be park, and expresses concern regarding the removal of separated and reused on the project site, as possible. Following construction waste. completion of the proposed improvements, all unpaved areas to be graded would be grassed or hydroseeded. Any remaining construction waste would be removed from the project site. IND7-H The letter states that more picnic tables are needed. Comments is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-I The letter indicates support for the use of solar lighting. Comments is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-f The letter expresses concerns with protection of marine Comments is noted. See section 3.2 of the EA for a discussion water resources, and requests signage regarding the marine quality. The County will consider the views expressed in these habitat and traditional practices. comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-K The letter states that the community population estimate Comment is noted. The community population estimate has been based on 2017 data is not accurate. updated in Section 3.9 of the EA with the best available information. IND7-L The letter expresses concerns with pavilion access control Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding the by community members, power source, and equipment park as a community resource. As described in the project description, including an automated external defibrillator. a new PV system will be installed. Reservations and use of the pavilion would not change with the project. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND7-M The letter expresses concerns with the sidewalk design Comment is noted. The Final EA Section 3.3 includes additional relative to sea level rise. discussion regarding Sea Level Rise and potential impacts to park features. Park maintenance and repair would be the responsibility of the Department of Parks and Recreation. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. Page 9 IND7-N The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA IND8 11/9/2020 Kamla Kuahuia, Against the project. are necessary. IND8-A The letter states that the proposed upgrades would benefit Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding tourists and visitors rather than the community. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA IND8-B The letter requests that funds be provided directly to the are necessary. Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in community for their use in making renovations to upgrade these comments in their review and actions on the proposed the halau/pavilion. accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are IND8-C The letter states that the proposed number of camping necessary. Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-13 regarding permits is excessive. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND8-D The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halau/pavilion, ADA compliance community consultation. The County will consider the views features, the proposed playground, and the expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the basketball/volleyball court. proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND9 8/27/2020 Melanie Lewis, Against the project. IND-A The letter states that Miloli'i Road has too much traffic Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-F regarding traffic now, and the project would bring more traffic. and access to the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND9-B The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. The letter community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the also states that the proposed upgrades would benefit views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the tourists and visitors rather than the community. proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page 10 IND9-C The letter states that the boat ramp is unimproved, and Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding should not be a public access ramp. community use and benefit of the park. Miloli`i Landing, north of the Beach Park, is on state lands and contains a rocky shoreline and a boat ramp. The proposed project does not include any changes to the boat ramp. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND10 11/9/2020 Stephanie Llaned-Taetuga, Mixed feelings about the project. IND10-A The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND10-13 The letter requests that funds be provided directly to the Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in community for their use in making renovations to upgrade these comments in their review and actions on the proposed the halau/pavilion. accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND10-C The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halm/pavilion and ADA community consultation. The County will consider the views compliance features. expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND10-D The letter expresses support for the playground upgrades. Comment is noted. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. INDII 11/8/2020 U`ilani Naipo, Mixed feelings about the project. INDII-A The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. The letter community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the also states that the proposed upgrades would benefit views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the tourists and visitors rather than the community. proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. INDII-B The letter indicates support for the resurfacing of the Comment noted. The County will consider the views expressed in volleyball/basketball court. these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. INDII-C The letter states that the proposed number of camping Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-B regarding permits is excessive. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page I I INDII-D The letter states that the proposed additional parking areas Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-L regarding the would cause congestion; the project could cause traffic and necessary site design elements and congestion. The County will parking issues for fishermen due to the tight turn -around consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and area. actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. INDII-E The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halau/pavilion and ADA community consultation. The County will consider the views compliance features. The letter also suggests renovation of expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the existing pavilion rather than construction of a new building. proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND12 11/8/2020 Melissa -Ann Mahealani (Hua) Waite -Crawford, Against the project. IND12-A The letter states that the proposed additional parking areas Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-L regarding the would cause congestion; the project could cause traffic and necessary site design elements and congestion. The County will parking issues for fishermen due to the tight turn -around consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and area. actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND12-B The letter suggests that DPR work with the community to Comment is noted. See response to comment SA4-A regarding discuss upgrades to the halau/pavilion and ADA community consultation. The County will consider the views compliance features. The letter also suggests renovation of expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the existing pavilion rather than construction of a new building. proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND12-C The letter expresses concerns with septic fields associated Comment is noted. See response to comment IND3-E regarding water with existing bathrooms, and requests more bathroom quality testing. The County will consider the views expressed in these stalls than proposed with the project. comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND12-D The letter expresses concerns that the project will harm Comment is noted. See response to comment IND7 ] regarding marine habitat. impacts to the marine environment. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No additional changes to the EA are necessary. IND12-E The letter states that the proposed project would not honor Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-C regarding and protect the cultural integrity of the village. The letter community use and benefit of the park. The County will consider the also states that the proposed upgrades would benefit views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the tourists and visitors rather than the community. proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. IND13 11/6/2020 Imaika Yeaman, Against the project. IND13-A The letter states that the proposed additional parking areas Comment is noted. See response to comment SA5-L regarding the would cause congestion; the project could cause traffic and necessary site design elements and congestion. The County will parking issues for fishermen due to the tight turn -around consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and area. actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are necessary. Page 12 IND13-B The letter states that the proposed number of camping Comment is noted. See response to comment IND1-13 regarding permits is excessive. camping permits. The County will consider the views expressed in these comments in their review and actions on the proposed accessibility improvements project. No changes to the EA are Page 13 APPENDIX B ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY 1231-081022 FINAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY TMK: (3) 8-9-004: 001 4 k w� t" P! MILOLI`I AHUPUXA SOUTH KONA DISTRICT ISLAND OF HAWAI`I HAUN & ASSOCIATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL, AND HISTORICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES 73-4161 KAAO ROAD, KAILUA-KONA HI 96740 PHONE: 808-325-2402 Fax: 808-325-1 520 1231-081022 FINAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY TMK: (3) 8-9-004: 001 MILOLI`I AHUPUXA SOUTH KONA DISTRICT ISLAND OF HAWAII Prepared by: Alan E. Haun, Ph.D. and Dave Henry, B.S. Prepared for: County of Hawai'i Department of Parks and Recreation c/o Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, HI 96826 August 2022 HAUN & ASSOCIATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL, AND HISTORICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES 73-4161 KAAO ROAD, KAILUA-KONA HI 96740 PHONE: 808-325-2402 Fax: 808-325-1 520 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No. 1231-081022 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Haun & Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 located in Miloli'i Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. The objective of the AIS is to satisfy current historic preservation regulatory review inventory requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD), as contained within Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR, Subtitle 13, Chapters 275 and 276, State Historic Preservation Rules. The project area comprises the current Miloli'i Beach Park; a 1.41 acre recreational facility located along the shoreline that contains a covered pavilion, a basketball/volleyball court, parking areas, a restroom, a catchment tank, a pump house, and firepits. The parcel is the former location of the Miloli'i School which closed in 1966 and was conveyed to the County of Hawai'i in 1969. The archaeological inventory survey identified three historic single feature sites. These consist of an erosion control retaining wall (Site 50-10-65-310971.), a discontinuous boundary wall (Site 31098), and an historic basketball court (Site 31099). The Site 31097 retaining wall functions to prevent coastal erosion, while the Site 31098 wall separates the project area from an adjacent house lot. The Site 31099 basketball court represents the only surviving remnant of the actual school facility. The mapping, written description and photography of Sites 31097, 31098, and 31099 adequately document them and no further work or preservation is recommended. The current project was done in conjunction with the preparation of an Environment Assessment for improvements to the existing Miloli'i Beach Park. Cover photo: Site 31097 retaining wall and Miloli'i Halau (view to west) 1 All sites listed on the State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP). Site numbers are 5 digit sequential numbers by island : 50 = State of Hawai'i, 10= Island of Hawai'i, 65=Miloli'i quadrangle, 31097 = Site number HAUN & ASSOCIATES 111 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Contents MANAGEMENT SUMMARY....................................................................................................... ii INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................1 Scopeof Work........................................................................................................................1 Project Area Description.........................................................................................................1 Methods.................................................................................................................................. 9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND.......................................................10 Historical Documentary Research.........................................................................................10 Previous Archaeological Work.............................................................................................. 27 Previous Archaeological Work in Project Area Vicinity.......................................................... 30 PROJECT EXPECTATIONS....................................................................................................32 CONSULTATION.....................................................................................................................32 FINDINGS................................................................................................................................34 CONCLUSION.........................................................................................................................40 Discussion............................................................................................................................40 Significance Assessments....................................................................................................40 Treatment Recommendations............................................................................................... 40 TRANSLATION OF HAWAIIAN WORDS..................................................................................41 REFERENCES......................................................................................................................... 42 f iii TMK:(3)8-9-0114:001 Report No. 1231-081022 Figures Figure 1. Portion of 7.5' 1998 USGS Miloli'i Quadrangle showing project area........................................................... 2 Figure 2. Tax Map Key 8-9-004 showing project area................................................................................................... 3 Figure 3. Proposed developments in the Miloli'i Beach Park....................................................................................... 3 Figure 4. January 2013 aerial view of project area (from Google Earth)...................................................................... 4 Figure 5. Feature A modern planter (view to west)...................................................................................................... 6 Figure 6. Feature B and C modern planters (view to west).......................................................................................... 6 Figure 7. Feature D modern planter (view to north).................................................................................................... 7 Figure 8. Feature G modern planter (view to east)...................................................................................................... 7 Figure 9. Wooden sign in Feature E planter (from Watson and Farber 2012).............................................................. 8 Figure 10. Feature F collapsed modern planter (view to west).................................................................................... 8 Figure 11. Ahupua'a boundaries and Land Commission Awards in Miloli'i Ahupua'a................................................ 11 Figure 12. Map of Kapalilua Region ( from modified from Maly and Maly 2003:2)................................................... 12 Figure 13. Undated photograph of Hau'oli Kamana'o Congregational Church (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website)..... 16 Figure 14. La 'Elima (from http://paaponomilolii.org/ Ho'opuloa wp-content/uploads/LaElima Program.pdf) ........ 17 Figure 15. Tsunami run-up heights in project area vicinity (from Loomis 1976:71)................................................... 19 Figure 16. Portion of Wall's 1914 Map of Okoe, Honomalino, and Kipahoehoe Government Tracts ........................ 21 Figure 17. Lava flow approaching Ho'opuloa Village (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:2).............................................. 22 Figure 18. Lava flow entering village at 5:15 am (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:3).................................................... 22 Figure 19. Houses destroyed by 5:30 am (Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:3)........................................................................ 23 Figure 20. 6:21 am photograph of lava entering ocean (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:4)......................................... 23 Figure 21. 6:30 am photograph of half of Ho'opuloa Village covered in lava (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:4) ........ 24 Figure 22. Portion of 1925 USGS Miloli'i Quadrangle................................................................................................. 25 Figure 23. January 17, 1965 aerial view of project area............................................................................................. 26 Figure 24. Portion of 1962 USGS Miloli'i quadrangle showing sites near Miloli'i....................................................... 31 Figure25. Site location map....................................................................................................................................... 35 Figure 26. Undated map of Miloli'i Beach Park showing Site 31097 retaining wall (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website) .................................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Figure 27. Site 31097 retaining wall (view to east)..................................................................................................... 36 Figure 28. Site 31097 retaining wall (view to northeast)............................................................................................ 37 Figure 29. Concrete pier block (view to west)............................................................................................................ 37 Figure 30. Site 31098, Segment 2 wall (view to southwest)....................................................................................... 38 Figure 31. Site 31098, Segment 3 wall (view to south)............................................................................................... 38 Figure 32. Site 31099 basketball/volleyball court (view to west)............................................................................... 39 Tables Table1. Modern Stone rings......................................................................................................................................... 5 Table 2. Significant Tsunamis in Hawai'I listed by location of source (from Loomis 1976:5)..................................... 18 Table 3. Summary of previous archaeological work................................................................................................... 29 HAUN & ASSOCIATES I iv TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No. 1231-081022 INTRODUCTION At the request of Bow Engineering, Inc., on behalf of the County of Hawai'I, Department of Parks and Recreation, Haun & Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of the 1.41 acre Miloli'i Beach Park (TMK:[3] 8-9-004:001) located in Miloli'i Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The objective of the AIS is to satisfy current historic preservation regulatory review inventory requirements of the Department of Land and Natural Resources -State Historic Preservation Division (DLNR-SHPD), as contained within Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Title 13, DLNR, Subtitle 13, Chapters 275 and 276, State Historic Preservation Rules (DLNR 2003). The survey fieldwork was conducted on May 14, 2019 by Haun & Associates Project Supervisor Solomon Kailihiwa, M.S and field archaeologist Ben Seay B.A., under the direction of Dr. Alan Haun. Approximately two person days of labor were required to complete the fieldwork portion of the project. Described in this final report are the project scope of work, field methods, background information, survey findings, and significance assessments of the identified site with recommended treatments. The current project was done in conjunction with the preparation of an Environment Assessment for improvements to the Miloli'i Beach Park facilities (Figure 3). These improvements consist of removing the existing comfort station and its reconstruction in a more accessible location, installing a new storage and supply system for the comfort station, creating a new accessible route connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities, resurfacing and retrofitting the basketball court, and installing vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. Scope of Work Based on DLNR-SHPD rules for inventory surveys the following specific tasks were determined to constitute an appropriate scope of work for the project: 1. Conduct background review and research of existing archaeological and historical documentary literature relating to the project area and its immediate vicinity --including examination of Land Commission Awards, ahupua'a records, historic maps, archival materials, archaeological reports, and other historical sources; 2. Conduct a high intensity, 100% pedestrian survey coverage of the project area; 3. Conduct detailed recording of all potentially significant sites including scale plan drawings, written descriptions, and photographs, as appropriate; 4. Conduct limited subsurface testing (manual excavation) at selected sites to determine feature function; 5. Analyze background research and field data; and 6. Prepare and submit Final Report. Project Area Description The project area comprises the Miloli'i Beach Park, a 1.41 acre recreational facility operated by the County of Hawai'i. The park contains a covered pavilion, a basketball/volleyball court, parking areas, a restroom, a catchment tank, a pump house, and firepits. The extent of the park is depicted in Figure 4 and in Figure 25 in the Findings section of this report. The coastal portion of the park consists of a rocky coastal escarpment and a large tidal pool. According to Farber and Associates (2011:53), the pavilion is an open air building known as the Miloli'i Halau; an 80 ft by 40 ft structure that, "...is the only public facility in the community that is covered and can accommodate large groups for meetings, gatherings, and events." The pavilion is depicted on the cover of this report. HAUN & ASSOCIATES I I T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 WAIMEA HIL\O KAILUA KEALAKEICUA p Map Loc ti PAHALAOt IIR1111111111111 rvraFmxrtr rUmr �,.r �,I, �. f7 KC puk r j MOW i mii 6i Bo t i We Makuak.h.d.niR-k Prdj cat ' �ti J IKapulau Pain a Hono lino Bay Z` Figure 1. Portion of 7.5' 1998 USGS Miloli'i Quadrangle showing project area ,y I o , 91� HAUN & ASSOCIATES 12 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 o-10 y „Ch Z.. F'o 1V7 d I V O I W a 0 C Q O h V 4 .4 n �. e 3 ^ifl Fk+ch r�l g Ii $ Y;�n 1 1 r o`;m r J r� q o L `!! Y ki IS c u/ C 3 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 _n v �s - PAVIVJON COW r a�4cEleu.l, s Nw STATION OIe } l i m W w � q ¢� 9 + raAalr. GENERAL SITE Pllfl Figure 3. Proposed developments in the Miloli'i Beach Park Figure 4. January 2013 aerial view of project area (from Google Earth) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 14 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Park vegetation consists of Ironwood (Casuarina equisetifolia) and milo (Thespesia populnea) trees, coconut palms (cocos nucifera), noni (Morinda citrifolia), and night -blooming cereus (Hylocereus undatus). There are a series of modern stone rings scattered throughout the project area. These rings are constructed of stacked and mortared boulders and cobbles, labeled as "A" through "H" on Figure 25. The rock rings are summarized in Table 1 and range in length from 3.1 to 5.75 meters, in width from 2.1 to 4.3 meters and in height from 0.3 to 0.5 meters. The majority of these features (Features A-D, G and H) are built around the bases of ironwood trees, likely to protect them from erosion (Figure 5 through Figure 8). Feature E contains a wooden sign reading "Miloli'i Last Fishing Village in Hawai'i Nei" (Figure 9) and ornamental plants including "Moses in the cradle" (Tradescantia spathacea) and a foxtail palm (Wodyetia bifurcate). Feature F is a collapsed planter surrounding a stump (Figure 10). Table 1. Modern Stone rings Feature Type Shape Length (meters) Width (meters) Height (meters) GPS Coordinates Haun & Associates field no. Easting Northing A Planter around ironwood Circular 4.3 4.3 0.45 194188 2123537 1231.11 B Planter around ironwood Oval 3.85 2.1 0.45 194192 2123544 1231.12 C Planter around ironwood Oval 5.75 4.15 0.45 194194 2123549 1231.13 D Planter around ironwood Circular 3.1 3.1 0.45 194203 2123545 1231.14 E Planter with sign and ornamental plants Oval 4.15 3.8 0.45 194231 2123528 1231.8 F Collapsed planter around stump Oval 3.2 2.9 0.5 194227 2123517 1231.5 G Planter around ironwood Circular 3.2 3.2 0.3 194226 2123508 1231.E H Planter around ironwood Circular 3.3 3.3 0.45 194217 2123497 1231.3 The physical characteristics of the general project area vicinity are described by Farber and Associates (2011) as follows: The present coastal village of Miloli'i is located on the relatively flat Kapalilua coastal plain. The three bays in the immediate area, Ho'opuloa Bay, Miloli'i Bay, and Omoka'a Bay, offer little or no protection from ocean waves and surge. Shoreline features in the community include a black sand beach at Ho'opuloa Bay; the broad, gently sloping lava flows extending into the sea between Ho'opuloa Bay and Miloli'i Bay; and the shallow and exposed lava platform reefs extending from Miloli'i Bay to Omoka'a Bay. The 1926 lava flow dominates the coastline on the Ho'opuloa side of the community. The other flows date from prehistoric times. (Farber and Associates 2011:15) The soil in the project area is comprised of rough broken land. This soil type is characterized by Sato et al. (1973:119) as being, "...located in very steep areas often broken by intermittent drainage channels. It is characterized by 20 to 60+ inches of undefined soils over soft weathered rock." It has a rapid runoff and an active erosion. It is classified as suitable for watershed and wildlife habitat. The underlying lava was deposited from 1,500 to 3,000 years ago from Mauna Loa Volcano (Wolfe and Morris 2001:11 and Sheet 3). Annual rainfall in the vicinity of the project area ranges from 750 to 1,350 mm (29 to 53 inches; Giambelluca et al. 2013). The mean average temperature in this general area is approximately 72.5 degrees F (usclimatedata.com). There are no natural water sources present in the project area; although a catchment tank is situated in the southeastern corner of the park. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 5 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 5. Feature A modern planter (view to west) Figure 6. Feature B and C modern planters (view to west) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 6 �qo wo .00 IN 1,01 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 9. Wooden sign in Feature E planter (from Watson and Farber 2012) ' C �ArWW ON _ v`+ \\�o .y \ r"h., .."` � �— S.•S'�1 1\1 S \6 S q 0 i .1[ °.m ____ : Figure 10. Feature F collapsed modern planter (view to west) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 8 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No.1231-081022 Much of the information in this report was obtained from the Pa'a Pono Miloli'i, an organization formed by a number of the families with ties to Miloli'i Village. Pa'a Pono Miloli'i maintains a website (paaponomilolii.org) which provides a wealth of information on the current project area and surrounding village. According to Maly and Maly: Many of the native families of the Kapalilua region continue to practice fishing and working the land as their kupuna did before them. The kupuna in the community today, see that many changes in the health and well being of the land, ocean, and their families have occurred. This concerns the kupuna and some of their family members. One area in which change is most notable is in the handing down of knowledge of the fisheries, native techniques of stewardship for them, and the practices of sustaining one's family through a healthy relationship with the ocean and land. (Maly and Maly 2004:41) Methods Archival research was conducted at the Hamilton Library Hawai'i and Pacific Collection at the University of Hawai'i at Manoa, the University of Hawai'i at Hilo Hawaiian Collection, the Land Survey Office and the Archives Division of the Hawai'i Department of Accounting and General Services, the Bishop Museum Archives, the State Historic Preservation Division library in Hilo, the State Survey Division, and the Hawai'i State Public Libraries in Honolulu and Hilo. The project area was surveyed with crew members spaced at 5.0 meter intervals. The ground surface visibility was excellent. The identified features were flagged with pink and blue flagging tape and a detailed plan map of the park, obtained from Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. was annotated with descriptive information (Figure 25 in Findings section). The features were photographed and standardized site and feature forms were prepared. No subsurface testing was conducted and no cultural material was recovered for analysis. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 9 TMK:(3)8-9-r)04:001 °snor t No. 1231-081022 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Historical Documentary Research The project area is located in the ahupua'a of Miloli'i in the district of South Kona. This ahupua'a extends from the shoreline at Miloli'i Bay inland more than 3.5 miles to approximately 2,050 ft elevation (Figure 11). It is bordered on the north, east and a portion of the south side by Ho'opuloa and by Omoka'a Ahupua'a on the remainder of the south side. According to Pukui et al. (1974) cited on the Na Puke Wehewehe 'Olelo Hawaii website (Wehewehe.org) Miloli'i is literally translated as a "fine twist" in reference to an expert sennit twister from the area who created cordage from olana bark that was used to make fishing nets. An alternative translation for Miloli'i is "small swirling" in probable reference to ocean currents in the area. The community of Miloli'i represents one of the more traditional fishing villages in Hawai'i. Miloli'i Village is described by Farber and Associates (2011) as follows: Established as a settlement dating back to the early Polynesian seafarers from the South Pacific, Miloli'i families have been fishing the offshore and nearshore waters for generations. The village has about 200 residents and 50 single-family homes. The majority of the residents are Native Hawaiian ... The Miloli'i community lies in the shadow of its most dominant geologic feature, the vast southwest slope of the 13,000-foot Mauna Loa volcano. Eruptive lava flows from Mauna Loa have continually influenced the area. Since 1832, the volcano has erupted forty times. Eight flows have traversed the slopes into North and South Kona, and four reached the ocean (1859, 1919, 1926, and 1950). The 1926 flow destroyed the fishing village of Ho'opuloa adjacent to Miloli'i and covered that settlement with 'a'a lava.. The present coastal village of Miloli'i is located on the relatively flat Kapalilua coastal plain. The three bays in the immediate area, Ho'opuloa Bay, Miloli'i Bay, and Omoka'a Bay, offer little or no protection from ocean waves and surge. Shoreline features in the community include a black sand beach at Ho'opuloa Bay; the broad, gently sloping lava flows extending into the sea between Ho'opuloa Bay and Miloli'i Bay; and the shallow and exposed lava platform reefs extending from Miloli'i Bay to Omoka'a Bay. The 1926 lava flow dominates the coastline on the Ho'opuloa side of the community. The other flows date from prehistoric times. (Farber and Associates 2011:15) Groza et al. (2010) provide a comprehensive discussion of historical background research conducted for the general project area vicinity. Much of the following is summarized from their report. The project area is located in a traditional sub -district of South Kona called Kapalilua. According to Maly and Maly, this sub -district, "extends from the Kealia-Ho'okena section of Kona to Kaulanamauna, situated on the Kona boundary of Ka'u, and includes the lands of Papa, Ho'opuloa and Miloli'i (2003:1). According to Clark, Kapalilua translates as "the double cliff' and references a two-sided cliff that has one cliff facing seaward and one facing to the north (2001:164). The extent of Kapalilua is presented in Figure 12. The Kapalilua area is cited in a mythological reference to preparations for an invasion of Hawai'i by Chief Kamalalawalu of Maui. According to Fornander, Kamalalawalu's son Kauhiokalani (or Kauhiakama) was sent to Hawai'i to determine the population of the island. "Kauhiakama thence traveled on from there to Kona Kapalilua, at the boundary of Ka'u and Kona, not meeting many people" (cited in Groza et al. 2010:24). Fornander also states that Kapalilua was given to Napunanahunui-a-Umi, daughter of Umi, and that these lands were held by her descendants until the arrival of Kamehameha 1 (1885:300). Kamehameha's love of'ahi fishing HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 10 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 R Q R 3 CL 3 3 s Q ri i 3 bs LL HAUN & ASSOCIATES 111 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 u '13b4 7iE1 ;trts'ni..* .A Fi.tF fz 627 628Pat'e-na.'� 3t. 1�4a �•"` � V �;�i3.. �S 1321 .7 f$70 H6a $45 1495. 1353 - Y� y. 3a9 i+&O1 tlP l;1.L 1.•G"�''^-�.,, I l3 o+iQ.$(7 W1�iQi3'?1'1 lllEr# • �.-r'�"�y� 945 732 3'axlaLrr"tu�F' 'hff 12T1 _ _--- _ 73C siQ kc 'ken�Y :K a"ap.6 ML33 944 kapalrlua Region S 673 of South Kona IHsc c 57PeRiy aTe6 _ rr 0d l41CPdiiO RAY -,:l^ f t -/ 172b $Taio)XA f } I " ;956 - +233 1c5B 1373 I '6GC uh 'k.c.el _ i" j 9574 193D tep�+aniaia 72k S6 qW 36.1 VdOQ f 1320 484 }-7C €BE3 174 i451i 740 .: A 5 It ' i t� 4 i 478 iF 1570 1100 .""ram, ;.+-Pz;• 1� ��11 Y 9.t 1, 322 5I8k0 4 LY•a fs40 I$25 r;a rc 9 a F ; «�✓ Y3c a Jta 4 I Fin 9 a85A 1l1Q 5-'f3a'>-� [g m cr•�_y, v'�t.aii' ti >., P¢p2$ay7 nu rf a `~ ryi(alC7 Prt ledtziO 17�o t IC naQ 3 `"32 . f fcr5m/5p r^' 1)1L75Y rf+��aY, %manxzi?d,.` 3l'�, v, rj'•w e +, a".F +�'e i ��'. i 745 O7ux•IIrtr isua'�;.a..II� -�C f+.J ,1 LlfrU FP+A-, ;2 0 .174 / - 3B7 j(jj k33Q �- 880 . rr tsso� ,A,: rn s y sad 1350 .orsp 605 .A3bla LTw—P�.;;}�- i290 347c r(,� i L (tltf 1, 720 bls f J i l 7 1420� + 73°�4. 673f �'- �, - aOD 3e❑ �'- �'`�-. i@9D \fire .clS �9IQ 4��A r�3•� rF �._ 755 �V409 740 *61P • - 55d 853 1 # {9fi0\' ti'Y� \ - �eFQrS 853 SOa .I�ay yc :7110 ��� 1330\, n3a £D67 17pPtl ial5 Figure 12. Map of Kapalilua Region ( from modified from Maly and Maly 2003:2) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 12 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No. 1231-081022 apparently brought him to the Kapalilua area. According to Kamakau, "If word was brought that 'ahi were plentiful at Kalae [South Point], off went the chief [Kamehameha] to the 'ahi fishing grounds, and he fished also at Kaulana, Ka'iliki, Pohue, Na-pu'u-o-Pele, Kapalilua, and at other places along the coast" (Kamakau 1961:203). During the late prehistoric/early historic period, Kapalilua was controlled by Keawe-a-Heulu, "his estates were the lands of Kapalilua, Kaawaloa and Kealakekua" (ibid.310). Kamakau reports that the lands of Kapalilua were given to a displaced Maui chief, Keawe-a-heulu, for his assistance to Ka-lani-'opu'u during battles with Ka-hekili between 1777 and 1779 (1961:310). During this period, "...Ka-lani- 'opu'u returned to Hawai'i to see Captian Cook, called Lono, all the chiefs returned with him to Hawai'i, and Ke'e- au-moku also left Hana to live at Honokua in Kapalilua, and later moved westward with his wife and children to Honomalino and Miloli'i" (ibid.:385). In 1782, Kau chiefs bearing the corpse of Ka-lani-'opu'u changed their plans to bury him in Kailua when they reached Kapalilua and learned that Kamehameha had arrived at Ke'ei (1'1 1959:13). I'i traveled to Kau in 1843 to solve a dispute between Catholics and Protestants on behalf of the government. He was assisted by residents of Kapalilua on his trip from Kahuku to Kainaliu (1959:169). In 1853, I'% traveling with Chiefess Victoria Kamamalu stopped at Papa in Kapalilua where they learned of the outbreak of a small pox epidemic "about 10 ahupua'a away from Papa" (I'i 1959:171). In the 1840s, political acts of the Hawaiian Kingdom government would change the land tenure system in Hawai'i. All lands were segregated into one of three categories: "Crown Lands" owned by the occupant of the throne, "Government Lands" controlled by the state, and "Konohiki Lands" controlled by the chiefs; and "were all subject to the rights of native tenants" (Chinen 1958:29, Beamer 2014:143). In 1846, King Kamehameha III appointed a Board of Commissioners commonly known as the Land Commissioners, to "confirm or reject all claims to land arising previously to the 101h day of December, AD 1845." Notices were frequently posted in The Polynesian (Moffat and Kirkpatrick 1995); however, the legislature did not acknowledge this act until June 7, 1848 (Chinen 1958:16; Moffat and Kirkpatrick 1995:48-49) and the act is known today as The Great Mahele. In 1850, the Kingdom government passed laws allowing foreigners to purchase fee simple lands (Speakman 2001:91). The Kuleana Act of 1850 allowed for fee simple land ownership by commoners. During the Mahele, four Land Commission Award (LCA) claims were made for parcels within Miloli'i Ahupua'a (LCA 8119, 8543, 9896, and 9897; see ). There are no LCA's within the project area. The Waihona 'Aina (2000) Mahele Database; which is a compilation of data from the Indices of Awards (Indices 1929), Native Register (NR n.d.), Native Testimony (NT n.d.), Foreign Register (FR n.d.) and Foreign Testimony (FT n.d.) provides information on the LCAs. LCA 8119, awarded to Hu, is comprised of a parcel located along the shoreline at Miloli'i Landing to the north of the project area (Parcel 1; see Figure 2), and a parcel in the inland portion of the ahupua'a at approximately 1,300 to 1,375 feet elevation. This pattern of a coastal house lot and an associated upland agricultural parcel is seen throughout the Kona region. This coastal/upland relationship is described by Borthwick et al. (1997:10) below: This Mahele induced pattern reflects the traditional Hawaiian settlement pattern where permanent habitation was concentrated at the coast and subsistence oriented agricultural pursuits extend up slope in a zonal pattern based on the correlation between rainfall and elevation. Traditionally there was a continuum of utilization through the zones (Kula, Kalu'ulu, Apa'a, and Ama'u). However, because of restrictions of the Kuleana Act itself, claimants were only awarded certain specific lots. Thus, the mid-1800's settlement pattern, as evidenced by the LCA data, included permanent habitation coastal house lots with upland agricultural lots. The upland lots, however, were separated by a considerable expanse of land that had formerly (traditionally) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 13 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 oAnor t No.1231-081022 been an integral part of the agricultural system which provided the necessary mix of subsistence oriented crops. (Borthwick et al. 1997:10) The remaining three LCA's are located in the inland portion of the ahupua'a between 1,100 and 1,500 ft elevation. These consist of LCA 8543 to Kahoohanohano, LCA 9896 to Nahina, and LCA 9897 to Kahoa. Groza et al. (2010) summarize information collected by Maly and Maly (2002) from a cultural study they conducted in Kapalilua lands. The historic primary residences were clustered along the coast or inland, adjacent to the highway (2002:119). Gardens associated with the inland residences were present near the highway with more extensively cultivated fields located further inland. One crop cultivated in these inland fields between the 1870s and 1920 was the narcotic drink 'awa (Piper methysticum). The residential gardens were often walled to prevent grazing cattle from damaging the crops. Historic land travel through this area was via one of two alaloa (road). One road followed the coastline and the other, known as Keala'ehu (the path of'Ehu), was in the vicinity of today's Mamalahoa Highway (Maly and Maly 2004:37). According to Maly and Maly, the Keala'ehu Trail "was modified by the 1850s, with improvements continuing until the makai route was all but abandoned by the 1860s (ibid.). In 1846, Chester Lyman, a professor from Yale University visited Hawai'i Island. Maly and Maly (2004:7) presents Lyman's account of his journey throughout the Kapalilua area, traveling along a coastal foot path between Kapu'a and Kipahoehoe where he hired a canoe to continue his trip to Kealakekua. The following entry describes his visit to the village of Miloli'i: September 3rd, 1846....The road most of the way was no road at all, but an exceedingly blind foot path, winding in various directions among the grass and lava, and utterly impossible to follow by any but a native eye. It seemed to grow rougher and rougher, and the path was very little if any "worked" or improved by leveling and laying flat stones to step on. The country generally seemed to be formed of flows of the roughest kind of clinkery lava, the irregularities being of all sizes from pebbles to up to hillocks. The way seemed long and weary, and when the sun had disappeared behind the ocean, and the shades of night were thickening around, we had but just attained a rough eminence from which Kapua was visible still some 3 or 4 miles distant ... The great advantage of traveling over clinkery lava by night is that the darkness makes the path all appear smoothe and even, and you are saved the trouble of selecting places for your feet... At 8 o'clock I reached Kapua, which is rather pleasantly situated on a cove of the sea. It is on one of the clinkery flows, and the region around is very rough. I proceeded at once to the beach, and enjoyed the luxury of a bath, after which I went to the house where I was to stop near the beach, and took my supper and made preparations for sleeping... I here for a real (12 % cents) bought a fine watermelon, which was delicious and refreshing... September 4th....A mile from Kapua we passed the little village of Koa and mile or two further on, passing Honomalino, we came to Milolii, where there is an extensive and beautiful sand beach covered by a fine grove of cocoanuts. Here I took breakfast under their shade. Maly and Maly 2007:7 ). Maly and Maly (2004) citing the Report of the Mission Station at Kealakekua, describe the location and condition of the churches in the project area vicinity in 1855, including one in Miloli'i Village. The churches of the South Kona Mission Station at this time were under the direction of Reverend John D. Paris. Since our last Annual Report our Church in S. Kona has been reorganized or divided into six branches... This arrangement while it greatly augments the labors of the Pastor or Miss. Is HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 14 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Renor t No. 1231-081022 nevertheless we think, as this people are scattered over a large extent of country, & can never all meet together, greatly beneficial to them. The first of these Churches extends Geographically from Hokukano on the North to Onouli on the South ... ... The other two Churches one at Kaohe & the other at Milolii. The former has 101 members the latter 140. Both these Chhs [Churches] have comfortable houses to worship in. The one at Kaohe is of thatch, the one [at] Milolii is stone. These Chhs are made up of the poor of this world & of the poor of Hawaii. Most of [the] people get a lively hood principally by fishing — their villages are mostly near the sea shore on the barren lava. Their food is cultivated back from the sea shore, the distance of from three to five miles, where the land is generally fertile & with proper culture would produce abundantly... At Milolii. We have some good people & some of whom we stand in doubt. A few living epistles known & read of all men — some whose light shines more dimly & through manyclouds & others whose light is darkness... The No. of Births in this District has been greater than in the two preceding (1) years & No. of deaths. Births 81 — Deaths 57... The Hau'oli Kamana'o Congregational Church is located adjacent to the project area on the inland side of the Miloli'i Road (see Figure 2). According to Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website http://paaponomilolii.org/the-village the church was constructed in 1865 under the direction of Reverend Paris. An undated photograph of the church is presented in Figure 13. The Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website also describes a powerful earthquake that struck Hawai'i Island on February 5, 1868, producing a tsunami that hit Miloli'i Village. The following account from Aunty Mona Kahele describes the incident: On February 5, 1868, there was a great tidal wave that destroyed the entire village of Miloli'i. Although homes, canoes, fishing equipment, and other things belonging to the people were all lost, they were thankful that not one life was lost, human or animal. The people never lost hope and began living by their same patterns again. The land had extended farther out but now there was deep water there and the sea had moved inland. The little Kalawina church used to be where the pine trees are today. The church was lifted up by the waves and set down many feet from where it had stood before. (Where it stands now is only a few feet away.) Not one board was broken by the wave and everything was just the same except the foundation. The church bell rang and rang until the building settled down and everything was quiet. Only the regular sound of the waves could be heard then. Everything on the beaches was neatly cleaned. It seemed to the people like it was the end of the world for them. They were cold and hungry. To keep warm that night they all gathered closed together near where the little church was set down by the wave. They gave their most heart felt prayers of thanksgiving to God Almighty for saving their lives. Even though they were hungry, they praised the one Maker of all mankind. During their prayers, they heard voices calling and torched lights coming from ma uka. At first the people were frightened because they thought maybe it was the dead coming to claim them. They huddled together more closely to protect the women and children. But as the lights came nearer and the voices kept calling out to the people, some of them recognized the voices of their 'ohana who lived up mauka. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 15 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 13. Undated photograph of Hau'oli Kamana'o Congregational Church (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website) The 'ohana brought much -needed food and clothing. There was much crying, hugging, rejoicing, prayers, and thanksgiving. The eldest in the village gathered all the people before the little church with all the food and clothing which had been brought to them. He told the people to kneel down with heads bowed, then he called out to the Father Almighty to bless the things which had been brought to them, and to bless the'ohana who had brought these gifts. He thanked Him for saving them and giving them another chance to live and flourish. From that day on, a rule was made to keep Sunday a sacred day and February 5, 1868, a day that must never be forgotten. The day must be respected and be a memorial for all to remember what water can do, and that God Almighty is much stronger. So from that day on, Sunday and the Hau'oli Kamana'o church became a symbol or a shrine for the people who were there during that great tidal. (http://paaponomilolii.org/wp-content/uploads/LaElimaProgram.pd ) The tragic events of February 5, 1868, are memorialized in a mele written by Aunty Elizabeth Kuahuia. The Hawaiian and English versions of this song are presented in Figure 14. Table 2, obtained from Harold Loomis' (1976) Tsunami Wave Runup Heights in Hawaii indicates that 22 tsunamis impacted the Hawaiian Islands between 1819 and 1975. According to this table, the 1868 tsunami was generated by seismic activity in Chile, and produced large waves throughout Hawai'i Island, with 15 ft waves noted in Hilo. Loomis HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 16 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 O'ta"Efima La `Elima o Pepeluali lWaimaka helele`i (he`e nei) i ke alanui Paiki pu`olo pa`a i ka lima (Maika pu olo a`a ika lima) Waimaka helele`i i ke alanui (Ae maka hele he`e nui i ke alanui) HUI: Penei pepe `alala nei (He nei pepe ala`a nei) He hu`i ma`e `ele kou nui kino Wu ima a hele kou nui kino) Ha`ina `ia mai ana ka puana He mele he inoa no Miloli'i (E mete he inoa no Miloli`i) MN The fifth day of February Tears fell along the roadway (Tears scattered in the street) Bags and bundles held tightly Tears fell along the roadway Chorus: The babies cry (You there, baby crying here) Numbing to the body (Your whole body will ache with chills) Tell the refrain (The refrain is told) A name song for Miloli `i (A song, a name song for Miloli`i) Source: www.huapala.org Figure 14. La'Elima (from http://paaponomilolii.org/wp-content/uploads/La ElimaProgram.pdf) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 17 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Table 2. Significant Tsunamis in Hawaii listed by location of source (from Loomis 1976:5) Origin of tsunami Year Size of waves and area affected Chile 1819 Waves of 6 feet reported on Kona coast (probably moderate waves island -wide) 1837 Large waves on all islands; 20 feet at Hilo 1868 Large waves island -wide; 15 feet at Hilo 1877 Large waves island -wide; 16 feet at Hilo 1906 Moderate waves, 12 feet at Maalaea 1922 Minor damage, 7 feet at Hilo 1960 Large waves island -wide, 35 feet at Hilo Ecuador. 1906 Moderate waves on Hawaii and Maui, 12 feet at Maalaea Japan 1896 Large 30-foot waves at Napoopoo, Keauhou, and Kanaloa, on west coast of Hawaii 1901 Small to moderate waves west coasts, 4 feet at Hilo, house swept away at Keauhou 1918 Small to moderate waves, 5 feet at Hilo 1933 Moderate waves, 10 feet on Kona coast Kamchatka 1841 Moderate waves island -wide, 15 feet at Hilo 1923 Large waves island -wide, 20 feet at Hilo 1952 Considerable damage to north coasts, 20-foot waves near Waimea Bay, Oahu Aleutians 1946 Large waves island --wide, 55 feet at northeast coast of Hawaii, 53 feet north coast of Molokai, 45 feet north coast of Kauai 1957 Heavy damage to northwest coasts, 53 feet at Haena Alaska 1964 Moderate waves on north coasts, 16 feet at Haleiwa Tonga 1919 Small waves except at Punaluu where 15-foot waves were reported Local 1868 Very large waves southeast coast of Hawaii, 60 feet at Kamoamoa, 45 feet at Keauhou, 10 feet at Hilo, 5 feet at Honolulu 1975 Southeast coast of Hawaii, 26 feet at Halape, 12 feet at Napoopoo, 8.5 feet at Hilo, <1 foot at other islands Unknown 1869 Waves of possibly 30 feet on Puna coast (1976:71) indicates that the Miloli'i area was impacted by tsunamis in 1946, 1957 and 1960. Figure 15 depicts the run-up heights of these destructive waves, ranging from 2 feet in 1946, to five feet in 1957. According to Loomis (1976:4), "After the 1946 tsunami, the Tsunami Warning System was established and a group of tsunami specialists was developed who were motivated to find and record tsunami heights as well as other pertinent data on tsunamis." HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 18 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 19.10, 155' 55' 2 2 Los o Komimi Papa Bay Los o Kamakohiki �HOOPULOA 2,_,5,3 +MILOLII Honoma/ino Bay Okoe Bay PAPA • LEGEND gpaab�gb Saba o i MILES I4AWAII N Konewaa Pr. 155655 Figure 15. Tsunami run-up heights in project area vicinity (from Loomis 1976:71). 19010, 19 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 H.W. Kinney (1913) published a guide to Hawai'i Island. His following account describes the coastal settlements in the vicinity of the project area: There are a few, very small fishing villages, Alae, Alika and Papa, which are reached by poor trails from the mauka road. It is necessary to travel from Hookena mauka to the main road to Papa, and thence by either road or trail to Hoopuloa, the last steamship landing in Kona. This is another village which is dwindling in population, only a few Hawaiians and a couple of Chinese storekeepers remaining. A fair road leads across a barren a -a flow to Miloli'i, the largest and best specimen of an exclusively Hawaiian village on the Island, which is seldom visited. It is splendidly situated by a sand beach, the sea coming right up to the yard wall, and is inhabited by a rather large population of Hawaiians, who prosper through the fishing which is almost phenomenally good... This region is seldom visited. Its chief points of interest are the remains of a heiau, mauka of the Catholic church at Milolii, some fine papa konane at the south end of the same village, a well preserved kuula (still used) where fishermen offer offerings of fruit to insure a good catch, by the beach south of Milolii, where the Honomalino Ranch fence crosses the trail; while all along the trail are smaller kuulas, and at many points the foundations of villages, where old implements may still be found. (Kinney 1913:65] The current Miloli'i Road, that extends along the inland side of the project area, existed as early as 1914 as depicted in Wall's Hawai'i Territory Survey map of the area (Figure 16), also obtained from the Manoa online library (http:Hmagis.manoa.hawaii.edu). This road originates at the upper Government Road (current path of Hawai'i Belt Road) and extends seaward to the coast, then turning south, providing access to the villages of Ho'opuloa and Miloli'i. According to Groza et al., Miloli'i Road was paved in the 1960s during the filming of "Girls, Girls, Girls", an Elvis Presley film shot in Miloli'i Village (2010:36). Figure 16 also indicates that the seaward portion of Miloli'i Ahupua'a was awarded to Kaleohano as Grant 1585, and that the interior portions were awarded to Kekepano as Grant 3023. The village of Hoopuloa, located to the north of the project area was destroyed by a 1926 lava flow from Mauna Loa. A series of Bishop Museum photographs, presented in a Pa'a Pono Miloli'i (1984) assessment for the development of the Miloli'i community depict the destruction of the village. These photographs are included as Figure 17 through Figure 21 below. Apple (1987) describes the destruction as follows: At about 0300 H.s.t. April 18, the flow rode over the stone walls behind the village and started burning outhouses. Pigs heard squealing in a pen were released. Destruction of the village was gradual and complete. As soon as lava began falling into the sea, steam shot up in jets. Hundreds of dead fish floated along the edge of the turbulent water that spread out from the contact area of hot rock and cold ocean. Hawaiians from Miloli'i came in their canoes and gathered the dead fish for salting and preserving. (Apple 1987 cited in Groza et al. 2010:32). Handy and Handy (1972) describe traditional agriculture in South Kona based on historic documentary research and informant interviews in the 1920s to 1940s as follows: ...South Kona was planted in zones determined by rainfall and moisture. Near the dry seacoast potatoes were grown in quantity, and coconuts where sand or soil among the lava near the shore favored their growth. Up to 1,000 feet grew small bananas which rarely fruited, and poor cane; from 1,000 to 3,000 feet, they prospered increasingly. From approximately 1,000 to 2,000 feet, breadfruit flourished. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 120 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 N + " fI Tfi/ck 7r,// ynrrn�ohia v, 147 e -INIHOIN R4¢k�1A t3 ` � no F�CJL oft lY/LL A!`L rn Gi.3r9p � � q _ 5. 1_ _ •lTao rc .1 U cr �03 1 t711 / 63' rPM/LoL// ✓/LL/-7G��I`��� "? - -, Cyr.3oa3 ff Projeccaar�e� sL.6Alriehie Af -- , j� -�K .✓r�q'i i �!1 ar= .. �o , �4. Gn /477: c /fumir/ru O 5,11 Figure 16. Portion of Wall's 1914 Map of Okoe, Honomalino, and Kipahoehoe Government Tracts HAUN & ASSOCIATES 121 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 :f .w• - Ir UA 1ap �3 Photo) towards the sea Figure 19. Houses destroyed by 5:30 am (Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:3) F�.. r-Y } `+ham.. • JACht S}�Elfk�TM.,_R'� DOy �P ItAT�{. tL' Figure 20.6:21 am photograph of lava entering ocean (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:4) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 123 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 21. 6:30 am photograph of half of Ho'opuloa Village covered in lava (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984:4) Taro was planted dry from an altitude of 1,000 to approximately 3,000 feet. An old method of planting taro in Kona, described as Lakalo at Ho'okena, was to plant the cuttings in the lower, warmer zone where they would start to grow quickly and then transplant them to the higher forest zone where the soil was rich and deep and where moisture was ample for their second period of growth, in which their corms are said to have developed to an average of 25 pounds each. At an altitude of about 2,300 feet in Kealia there was in 1931 an old-style upland taro plantation corresponding exactly to descriptions by the early voyagers, with the flourishing taro planted in twos and threes in holes in even lines, spaced about 4 feet apart, the surface covered with a mulch of dried ama'u fern. The borders of the patches were marked by zones of rock thrown up through the field, on top of and along the sides of which were clumps of native sugar cane. Hawaiian bananas where planted here and there between the taro fields. (Handy and Handy 1972:524-525) Handy and Handy (1972) also indicate that there were two methods of dry taro cultivation. The first is pu'epu'e, which entails planting taro in stone mounds in areas with little or no soil (1972:525). Once the taro was planted in the mounds, it was covered with imported soil. The second is kanu pa'eli, a method utilized in areas that did contain soil. Holes to plant the soil were dug in the soil, then were covered with soil and rocks. Figure 22 is a portion of the 1925 USGS Miloli'i quadrangle (obtained from the University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library). This map depicts the Miloli'i Road extending seaward through the area and turning to the south near the shoreline. A trail or minor road continues to the south from the end of the Miloli'i Road. This trail continues south to where it ends in Kapua Ahupua'a at the Niuou Coconut Grove. A series of perpendicular trails HAUN & ASSOCIATES 124 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 12 3 1 - 0 8 10 2 2 r r Its L. Oe a Xamasrahtkt 1 91 1 o) c ]d� Projec� area 0 ac, Hw7o tob'-rO Bay Trail or minor road----!. "a'aBane S/o alto aay ! f , 0 e Ivit OcoanU Cro Figure 22. Portion of 1925 USGS Miloli'i Quadrangle N HAUN & ASSOCIATES 125 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Renor t No. 1231-081022 extend inland from this coastal trail in Omoka'a and Honomalino Ahupua'a, with multiple inland/seaward trails in Kapua Ahupua'a. Figure 22 also depicts a curved stone wall extending inland from the southern end of the Miloli'i Road. The project area comprises the Miloli'i Beach Park. The park contains a covered pavilion (Miloli'i Halau — see cover of this report), a basketball/volleyball court, parking areas, a restroom, a catchment tank, a pump house, and firepits (see Figure 25 in Findings section). The park is the former location of the Miloli'i School which closed in 1966 and the land conveyed to the County of Hawai'i in 1969. According to Eric Ochi, Project Parks Manager for the County of Hawai'i, Department of Parks and Recreation, the structures from the school were removed; however the basketball court was in existence when the school was in operation. The restroom facility was constructed in late 1986/early 1987, and the halau was built before 2006. Figure 23 is an aerial view of the project area vicinity taken on January 17, 1965 by the U.S. Geological Survey and obtained from the University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library (http://magis.manoa.hawaii.edu). This map depicts the outline of the school within the project area, along with the 1926 lava flow to the north, and the Miloli'i Road. r I � 'ae �t_�✓r,�,V* �4"r+,�""1� it �� �` �� � .III. � IJI r y� Iwo r 1 w+�144, *'" .r WR 5 'r INK 'lfF.c� � pt�,^"`�..�`�'�''•' .r, "�i#-rc,✓'t 1._ � s �+'�,t{• TM �� .� ^�,"•,k,�•,+r'.�ry ,'�..r�, .n5i�.y,,.i 6rdt!•i` Sd�"....4P d. Project area •� ri���'�^� c��`.�� �'' ''r��J.�q�-,�" �4'83'�1�:5-�,,r��a .�rrv' - t ; .n yr;-y"a�.f d�°� r�' �� G•^� ,*' t k r Fi�'�+ �. '�" J"R �P r. �K�G��..:E { .. i,''r f✓ r+r +•.`� ��'".,t �ti 1Pd.. �d , � f • � r Figure 23. January 17, 1965 aerial view of project area HAUN & ASSOCIATES 126 TMK:(3)8-9-r)04:001 Report No. 1231-081022 Previous Archaeological Work A search of the DLNR archives indicates that at least 15 archaeological studies have been conducted in the general vicinity of the project area. The location of these studies is presented in Figure 13. Not included in this figure are the general studies by Thrum (1907) and Stokes (reported in Stokes and Dye 1991) which focused on major sites throughout Hawai'i Island, and a survey along the west coast of Hawai'i by Reinecke (1930). No sites were noted by Thrum in Miloli'i; however, Reinecke (1930) made several observations about the area. Reinecke indicates that the 1.25 miles between Papa and Hoopuloa were not examined as it is rough a'a lava, which according to locals contained no sites. At the destroyed village of Hoopuloa, Reinecke states that," ...nothing is left of the original village except two walls (1930:169). Two sites were identified in the Miloli'i area consisting of several graves and a pool (Site 63) and the district of Miloli'i (Site 64.) These sites are described as follows: Site 63. The area from the Hoopuloa Flow to Milolii is old a -a flow with only a few graves at the north end and a cleft in the middle, with vegetation and perhaps a little seepage. At the north border of Milolii is a very brackish pool. (Reinecke 1930:169). Site 64. Milolii: The district of Milolii is divided, according to natives, into four divisions, Waikini, Kalaninali, Umoka'a, and Kulini. The first two do not show up on the topographic sheet. It would be a safe estimate to allow one house site for every house now standing in Milolii. There are graves at the south end of the village, and back of the mauka houses at the northern end. There is a boulder lying on the shore of Milolii Bay in the waikini section of the village, of ordinary appearance, also called Waikini. It is credited with supernatural powers in protecting canoeists in time of storm, when they are guided back to shore by a radiance proceeding from the stone. There is the usual story of a group of sacrilegious natives carrying the stone from its place: it was found in the morning to have returned to its usual place, from which it cannot be budged by the worse storm; while the four men who carried it away each suffered some great misfortune. There is a heiau by the schoolhouse, HALEOKALOA, which I did not see, being told about it after I had left the village. A large platform in the north graveyard was also pointed out as a heiau, but no name is attached to it, the opinions of the natives are divided, and it is plainly a mere puoa. The shallow bay at the north side of Mokuokahailani Pt. was a fishpond, the breakwater now being submerged. At the head of the pond is a recently erected round platform. On the base of Mokuokahailani is an old, badly damaged platform c. 75x35, which looks like a typical old ruined heiau, but it is not. (Reinecke 1930:170) The majority of modern archaeological investigations in the vicinity are summarized in Table 3. Excluded from this table is a study by Robins et al. (1994) that was not available for review. This study is summarized in Groza et al. (2010:38) and consists of an approximately 1,250-acre portion of Kapu'a in which 108 sites including heiau, temporary and permanent habitations, a burial, and complexes of agricultural features and historic ranching features were identified. The remaining projects examined more than 7,067 acres at elevations ranging from the shoreline inland to approximately 2,800 ft elevation. These projects identified 319 sites with 920 features. To aid in reconstructing settlement patterns, features were quantified by probable age and function, and the studies are ordered by elevation. Traditional Hawaiian features were categorized as habitation, agricultural, burial (including possible HAUN & ASSOCIATES 127 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Danor t No.1231-081022 burials), ritual, refuge, ahu and trails. Features not assignable to these categories were categorized as miscellaneous/indeterminate. Habitation sites are further subdivided into temporary and permanent for studies making this distinction. Density values are given for sites, features, and habitation and agricultural features. The studies have identified 384 habitation features, 376 agricultural features, 39 burials, 14 refuge features, 16 ritual features, 29 trails and 82 ahu. The historic features were not segregated by function; although the majority of these are historic ranch walls. Overall feature density values range from 0.04 to 33.33 features per acre with an average of 6.58 features per acre. One of the first modern archaeological investigations in the area was a reconnaissance survey of a 0.25-acre parcel located in coastal Kapu'a conducted by Hammatt in 1980. This survey identified a paved coral surface surrounded by a stone wall. Soehren (1988) and Barrera (1989) conducted additional work at the site. Soehren's (1988) work correlated the parcel to LCA 10527:1, indicating that it had been occupied prior to the Mahele. Barrera (1989) excavated a test unit in the pavement and extensively photographed the site. A variety of midden and historic artifacts were recovered from the excavation. Between 1982 and 1988, Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D. Inc. (PHRI) conducted a series of archaeological investigations of the 6,700—acre Farms of Kapu'a project. This parcel extended across the width of the Kapu'a Ahupua'a from the coast to 1,100 ft elevation. A reconnaissance of the area was conducted by Rosendahl (1983), with a subsequent addendum study undertaken the following year (Rosendahl 1984). The survey covered 100% of the coastal zone and a 15% sample of the inland portion, intended to examine areas of variable environment and topography. Forty-six sites were identified during this project. In 1987 and 1988 Haun and Walker (1988) conducted a more intensive study of the Farms of Kapu'a area, utilizing aerial surveys and more extensive ground survey. An additional 251 sites were identified during this study. The combined projects conducted by Rosendahl (1983, 1984) and Haun and Walker (1988) identified a total of 297 sites with 951 component features. The 951 features consisted of 331 agricultural features, 278 temporary habitations, 69 habitations, 14 refuge features, 16 religious features, 39 burials or possible burials, 25 trails, 82 cairns, 59 quarries, 6 livestock control features, 23 indeterminate features and 9 miscellaneous features comprised of tool preparation (2, recreation (1), water source (4), rock art (1) and storage (1). The majority of the features are pre - contact in origin, although the livestock control and storage features are historic. Testing at an inland cave site yielded charcoal and volcanic glass that was dated between AD 800 to AD 1,100. In 1995, Barrera (1995) conducted an inventory survey of a 0.18 acre parcel in Honomalino Ahupua'a at approximately 100 ft elevation. The survey identified one site with two features consisting of a midden deposit (Feature A) and a stone wall (Feature B). The midden deposit was interpreted as a pre -contact habitation loci and the wall as a portion of an historic LCA enclosure. In 2005, PHRI undertook an archaeological assessment survey and cultural impact assessment of the c. 15,000-acre South Kona Watershed Irrigation System Project (Rosendahl 2006). This area extends from Papa 1 in the north to Kapu'a in the south and varied in elevation from 800 to 3,000 ft. The 15,000-acres were sample surveyed using a series of fourteen 100 ft wide water pipeline transects that extended through the area. The survey identified eight sites with 22 features including livestock control walls, permanent habitations, a road and agricultural features. According to Rosendahl, the area has been, "extensively modified and developed during historic times, as evidenced by the extensive current agricultural use of the land and the findings of the archaeological assessment field work" (2006:ii). HAUN & ASSOCIATES 128 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Y i 3 R 00 0 0 d R s R 0 i Q 0 T R CE G 3 M N FT .o, m S w v � c m m � L a N � N � f a m ce ti ti v � v z a a m > > a o o m y 0 0 0 a " v u � c y � w a z� 1 o Op m + N ti n E a N f L c c OJ O c •- � a+ a v m a L c m ro o v�i o vi w m y m 0 vi 0 0 .+ = w a c O � m w m m S v � cO �!1 m m y LL a a o cd w v w d `y o- Iq 0 O 0 8 a Lll vi O 0 Ll1 0 O 0 N o m m m N v O z '^ bq y a r al vt O O N N O ci O cNi I� N N Iq O ao � W O W N O 00 O O O O O N O 0 ON N N O N 0 N w cmi w O O d \ O "O OJ N Y Q 2 Z z z N Q N N N N N F cC Q O p E n n L 2 Y Y C C E Y Y a a a 2 Y a o x a= 0 o x O $ -o CO m 1 oN 9 m c c t � Y -o m=— ca c ca •, ., o °1 ca m E w L wm 1O t -o io c o `w oN � N .� o= w ti o -o m o c o o a _ = w E o „ w o o = o = N N L_ HAUN & ASSOCIATES 129 TMK:(3)8-9-r)04:001 Danor t No.1231-081022 The South Kona Watershed Irrigation System project area was subsequently subjected to an archaeological inventory survey by CSH in 2008 (Groza et al. 2010). This project included the same transect corridors previously examined by Rosendahl (2006) and additional sections of the proposed irrigation water distribution system, totaling approximately 212 acres. This survey documented the 8 previously identified sites and 7 newly identified sites with 24 features. The features consisted of 28 historic and 18 pre-contact/early post contact features. The historic features consist of four sections of the Old Mamalahoa Road and 24 historic livestock control walls. The remainder are comprised of 15 agricultural features, one temporary habitation and two permanent habitation features. Three non -cultural lava tubes and a cave were also identified. Rechtman (2000) undertook an inventory survey of a small (40 ft by 40 ft) area for a cell tower in Kapu'a Ahupua'a at approximately 1,200 ft elevation. The parcel was located in an active macadamia nut orchard. No sites were present in the parcel although an historic stone wall situated on the boundary between Kapu'a and Okoe Ahupua'a was noted. In 2012, Scheffler et al. (2012) conducted an inventory survey of 122 acres in Papa 1 and 2 at elevations ranging from approximately 2,390 to 2,640 ft. This survey identified an historic ranch wall, a complex of three historic agricultural features and an historic enclosure interpreted as a possible camp or agricultural exclosure. Scheffler (2012) also documented an historic ahupua'a boundary wall (Site 28991) located on the land division between Papa 1 and 2 at approximately 2,250 to 2,420 ft. This project also included a preservation plan for the wall. Haun & Associates conducted an inventory survey of a 25.62 acre parcel in Papa 2 (Haun and Henry 2013). The parcel is located on the south side of Miloli'i Road at elevations ranging from approximately 1,280 ft to 1,385 ft. Archaeological Consultants of the Pacific, Inc. (ACP) had conducted a survey of the same parcel in 2012; however the work was never reported because of the death of the firm's owner and principal archaeologist, Joseph Kennedy. The survey identified five single feature sites and two site complexes. The feature functions consist of pre -contact agriculture (n=30), permanent habitation (14) and historic livestock control (3). A 5.97 acre parcel in coastal Papa 2 was examined in 1993 during a field inspection by the DLNR-SHPD (Hibbard 1993). The inspection was conducted in response to permit violations incurred during the April 1993 construction of a concrete boat ramp along the coastline. This project documented 13 features interpreted as elements of the Site 4185 Papa Bay Complex, consisting of enclosures (Features 1, 9, 10), a mound and platform (Feature 2), a terraced platform (Feature 3), terraces (Features 4 and 6), a lava blister (Feature 5), a boulder alignment (Feature 7), a wall (Feature 8), two pavements (Features 11 and 12) and a steppingstone trail (Feature 13). This parcel was subsequently subjected to an AIS by Haun and Henry (2015), who relocated the 13 features of Site 4185, along with a stone wall along the boundary between Papa 1 and 2 Ahupua'a, a pre -contact habitation platform with evidence of historic use, and a road or trail. ASite Preservation Plan was subsequently prepared for the parcel by Haun and Henry (2018). Previous Archaeological Work in Project Area Vicinity According to information presented by Farber & Associates (2011) in an environmental assessment for the Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center, the project area and surrounding vicinity were surveyed between 1973 and 1974 during the Statewide Inventory of Historic Places Survey. Five sites were reportedly identified in the area, consisting of the following: • Magoon House — a unique example of a small wooden "Kona House" built in the late nineteenth century of the area. • St. Peter's Catholic Church - a fine example of this architectural style. The Church was built in 1932 by Father Steffen to replace an earlier St. Peter's destroyed by the 1926 lava flow. • Apo House - an example of typical architecture of older houses in the Miloli'i District. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 30 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 • Miloli'i School - an example of this architectural style. • Hau'oli Kamaha'o Congregational Church - an example of architectural style with historical significance. The church was built about 1887 and is an excellent example of early missionary wood construction. Haun & Associates contacted SHPD regarding these sites; however, little information is available. SHPD GIS Specialist Michael Wahl consulted the State's GIS database, DocuShare, the Historic Hawai'i Foundation website, the Bishop Museum website, and old State Register files. No corresponding SIHP site numbers were found for the five sites. Mr. Wahl did provide an annotated portion of the 1962 USGS Miloli'i quadrangle that depicts a large area designated as Site 4183 (Figure 24). This site potentially corresponds to the Site 64 Miloli'i District identified by Reinecke (1930:170). This map also shows Site 7352 which is in the location of the Hau'oli Kamaha'o Congregational Church. Figure 24. Portion of 1962 USGS Miloli'i quadrangle showing sites near Miloli'i Mr. Wahl also provided an application form for the construction of a house on the Hau'oli Kamaha'o Congregational Church property across the Miloli'i Road from the present project area. This form contains an entry by landowners Shirley and Amoe Casuga regarding historic sites in the area which mentions the former Miloli'i School. This entry states the following: HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 31 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Deport No.1231-081022 The historic site I can think of is where the Milolii School used to be and is now the Milolii Park. It closed down in the year 1966, and all of the children had to go to Hookena School and Konawaena High School. Mr. Jeff Ochi, Project Parks Manager for the County of Hawai'i, Department of Parks and Recreation, in an e-mail correspondence Emi Tanitomi, of Bow Engineering & Development, Inc., describes the origins of the current structures within the Miloli'i Park. According to the following description, no remnants of the school structures exist except the basketball court. To the best of my knowledge, all the old structures from the when the parcel was the school grounds have been removed (out houses, wooden water tank). The comfort station that is there now was constructed in late 1986—early 1987. The community center structure was built probably early to mid 2000's (prior to 2006). Not sure if the basketball court (surface and backboards) are of concern but they were already there from when the parcel was the former school grounds. I believe that the parcel was EO'd (Executive Ordered) to the County of Hawaii in 1969. There are CRM type walls built around the bases of some of the ironwood trees, not sure when they were built, and most times it was built by the community volunteers. PROJECT EXPECTATIONS Based on the preceding information, limited remnants of the historic Miloli'i School, excluding the basketball court, remain within the project area. The effects of multiple tsunamis and the historic impacts to the property by the construction and use of the school, suggests that no pre -contact archaeological sites or features will be encountered. CONSULTATION Kepa Maly (Maly and Maly 2003) conducted a series of oral history interviews with seven kupuna raised in Kapalilua with the primary aim of examining changes in the traditional fishing practices of the region. The interviewees consisted of Louis Kanoa Hao, Sr. (born in 1907 at Ka'ohe, South Kona), Mrs. Mary Tom-Ahuna (born in 1899 at Ka'alaea, O'ahu), Hannah Waha Pohaku Grace Kawa'auhau-Acia (born in 1917 at Ka'ohe), Walter Keli'iokekai Paulo (born in 1917 at Napo'opo'o in South Kona), Edward T. Ka'ana'ana (born in 1925, in Honolulu), Eugene Keawaiki Kaupiko (born in 1931 at Miloli'i), and Samuel Kamuela Waha Pohaku Grace (born in 1927 at Ka'ohe). His general findings are summarized as follows: Interestingly, nearly all of the interviewees commented on changes they had observed in the quality of the fisheries, and the declining abundance of fish —noting that there were significant declines in almost all areas of the fisheries, from near -shore to the deep sea. The interviewees attribute the changes to many factors, among the most notable are: • Loss of the old Hawaiian system of konohiki fisheries; adherence to seasons of kapu fisheries (managed by ahupua'a and island regions); and lack of respect for ahupua'a management systems and tenant rights. • Too many people do not respect the ocean and land —they over harvest fish and other aquatic resources, with no thought of tomorrow or future generations. It was observed that taking more than one needs, only to freeze it for later, removes viable breeding stock from the fisheries, and as a result, leads to depletion of the resources. • Sites traditionally visited by families, having been developed and/or traditional accesses blocked. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 32 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Deport No.1231-081022 • Changes in the environment —near shore fisheries destroyed by declining water flow and increasing pollution. • Use of modern technology —including depth gauges, GPS, and fish aggregation devises to maximize harvests —makes it too easy for fishermen to locate fish. Fishermen no longer need to have in-depth knowledge of the ocean and habits of fish, as was necessary in earlier times. Failure of the state system to enforce existing laws, rules and/or regulations. Interviewee recommendations included, but are not limited to: • Return to a system patterned after the old Hawaiian ahupua'a, kapu and konohiki management practices. • Designate one day a week —historically, it was Lapule (Sunday) —when no fishing would occur, to allow the fish to rest and regenerate. Many of the Miloli'i vicinity fisher - people (particularly those associated with Pa'a Pono Miloli'i), are working to have the state designate the primary ko'a 'opelu ('opelu fishing stations) at Ka'akuli Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa (all fronting the extended community of Miloli'i), set aside as subsistence fishery management units (ko'a). These ko'a are based on the traditional fishing grounds of the native families of the land, and tied to generations of care and fishing by the same families who would manage them. • A significant problem for the native fishermen of these ko'a is that outsiders, and some local residents who have focused on economic fishing, use foreign baits, which change the character of the ko'a; and fish in a manner that leads to depletion of the fishery. • Enforce existing laws and kapu; ensure that penalties for infractions are paid. Take only what is needed, leaving the rest for tomorrow and the future. (Maly and Maly 2003:42-43) No specific information concerning the Miloli'i School is presented in Maly and Maly (2003); however Walter Keli'iokekai Paulo, a master fisherman descended from a line of canoe makers mentions a teacher who taught at the school. "She has this 'upena for akule. So we would use this 'upena. The one that was in charge of this operation was the papa of Abby Paulo, her who was a school teacher I think, in Miloli'i one time (2003:188). HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 33 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 FINDINGS The archaeological inventory survey of the Miloli'i Beach Park identified three historic single feature sites. These consist of an erosion control retaining wall (Site 31097), a discontinuous boundary wall (Site 31098), and an historic basketball court (Site 31099). The location of the three sites is presented in Figure 25 and the sites are described below. Site 31097 is a mortared stone retaining wall that extends along the north and west side of the Miloli'i Beach Park. This retaining wall is depicted in an undated historic photograph of the park, obtained from the Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website (http://paaponomilolii.org/the-village; Figure 26). The retaining wall extends along the north and western sides of the park property, and is constructed of stacked, faced and mortared boulders and cobbles. The surface of the wall is capped with cement mortar that is 0.85 to 0.9 meters wide. The wall originates outside the parcel to the northeast, extending along the western side of the Miloli'i Road. It enters the project area at the northeastern corner of the park, and extends 65.0 meters to the west, where it angles to the south for an additional 7.0 meters. These portions of the site appear to represent the original retaining wall that bordered the park, based on their appearance. Overviews of the original retaining wall are presented on the cover of this report and in Figure 27 and Figure 28. There is a broken concrete pier block located seaward of the retaining wall on the coastal escarpment. The pier measures 0.5 meters square at the base, 0.42 meters square at the top and 0.3 meters in height. A broken section of the pier is located to the northeast (Figure 29). There are additional portions of the retaining wall located along the western side of the park, 4.5 meters south of the original section. These portions extend an additional 26.0 meters to the southwest, following the edge of the coastal escarpment. The appearance and condition of these sections of the retaining wall suggest they are modern additions to the site. Site 31097 is interpreted as an historic erosion control feature likely built to prevent coastal erosion of the park and the adjacent Miloli'i Road. The site is altered and in fair condition. It is assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under Criterion d (information content) and is recommended for no further work. Site 31098 is a discontinuous stone wall that extends along portions of the southern boundary of the Miloli'i Beach Park. There are three segments of intact wall (Segments 1-3) separated by gaps. Segment 1 originates at the southeastern corner of the parcel and extends 29.3 meters to the northwest where it terminates. A perpendicular section of the wall extends to the south from the eastern end outside the project area. This portion is 0.9 meters in width and ranges in height from 0.25 to 0.9 meters. The eastern is in relatively good condition; however the western portion is collapsed. No cultural material is present in association with the wall. Segment 2 is located 12.0 meters to the west of the seaward end of Segment 1. It is 7.8 meters long (north -south), 0.9 meters wide and 1.0 meters in height. Segment 3 is located 2.9 meters north of Segment 2. This portion of the wall is 9.9 meters long, 0.75 to 0.8 meters wide and 0.6 to 0.9 meters in height. The Site 31098 wall is constructed of stacked and faced boulders and cobbles with no cultural material present. Overviews of the wall are presented in Figure 30 and Figure 31. A modern wall is located 5.0 meters to the north of Segment 3. This wall is also located on the project boundary between the park and the adjacent house lot. This wall extends 3.2 meters to the north, then angles to the west and southwest for 38.0 meters. The appearance and condition of this wall indicates it is a modern addition to the park. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 34 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 a U m m U a m 0 •o i O r o ce) � �Z Op J a � r � 1 f \ r \ r !! c E w� z cn m l d � � � r HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 35 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 26. Undated map of Miloli'i Beach Park showing Site 31097 retaining wall (from Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website) INS Figure 27. Site 31097 retaining wall (view to east) ii HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 36 w �a!� .94 4 w yyq� T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 Figure 30. Site 31098, Segment 2 wall (view to southwest) Figure 31. Site 31098, Segment 3 wall (view to south) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 38 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Renor t No. 1231-081022 Site 31098 is interpreted as an historic boundary wall that separates the park from an adjacent house lot. This is based on its location on the project area boundary and its formal type and appearance. The wall is altered and in fair condition. It is assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under Criterion d (information content) and is recommended for no further work. Site 31099 is a basketball/volleyball court located in the southeastern portion of the project area. It is rectangular in shape and is 24.2 meters (79 feet) long (northwest by southeast) and 15.0 meters (49 feet) wide, surrounded by a 6 ft high chain -link fence. There are basketball hoops with backboards at each end and there are two posts for the volleyball in the middle of the court (Figure 32). r�- — --- r '� 14v1: Figure 32. Site 31099 basketball/volleyball court (view to west) According to Jeff Ochi of the County of Hawai'i, the court existed when the parcel was used as the former school grounds. The County of Hawai'i obtained the land in 1969, indicating that the court is at least 50 years old, making it an historic property. The basketball hoops, volleyball posts and chain -link fence are however modern additions to the site, and the surface of the court has likely been reconditioned. The site is altered and in good condition. It is assessed as significant per HAR §13-284-6 under Criterion d (information content) and is recommended for no further work. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 1 39 TMK:(3)8-9-r)04:001 Report No. 1231-081022 CONCLUSION Discussion The survey documented remnants of the Miloli'i School. These consist of an erosion control retaining wall (Site 31097), a discontinuous boundary wall (Site 31098), and a basketball court (Site 31099). The Site 31097 retaining wall functions to prevent coastal erosion, while the Site 31098 wall separates the project area from an adjacent house lot. The Site 31099 basketball court represents the only surviving remnant of the actual school facility. No pre -contact archaeological sites or features are present in the parcel. This is likely due to the extensive historic and modern use of the project area, and potentially by the multiple tsunamis that have inundated the Milioli'i area. Significance Assessments The sites identified during the survey are assessed for significance based on Hawai'i Administrative Rules (HAR) §13- 284-6. According to (HAR) §13-284-6 (b), a site must possess integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and/or association and shall meet one or more of the following criteria: 1. Criterion "a": Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad patterns of our history; 2. Criterion "b": Be associated with the lives of persons important in our past; 3. Criterion "c": Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work of a master; or possess high artistic value; 4. Criterion "d": Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or history; and 5. Criterion "e": Have an important traditional cultural value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional 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. Sites 31097, 31098, and 31099 possess integrity of location and materials. The sites are assessed as significant under Criterion "d". The sites have yielded information important for understanding the historic use of the project area. Treatment Recommendations The mapping, written description and photography of Sites 31097, 31098, and 31099 adequately document them and no further work or preservation is recommended. The current project was done in conjunction with the preparation of an Environment Assessment for improvements to the existing Miloli'i Beach Park (see Figure 3). HAUN & ASSOCIATES 140 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - 0 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 TRANSLATION OF HAWAIIAN WORDS' ahupua'a — traditional Hawaiian land unit usually extending from the uplands to the sea akule - Big -eyed or goggle-eyed scad fish (Trachurops crumenophthalmus) heiau — pre -Christian place of worship, shrine kapu — taboo, forbidden ko'a - fishing grounds konohiki — headman of an ahupua'a land division under the chief kuleana — small piece of property, as within an ahupua'a kuula - any stone god used to attract fish Mahele — land division of 1848 makai - seaward mauka — inland mele - Song, anthem, or chant of any kind 'ohana - family, relative, kin group 'opelu - Decapterus spp puoa - house for depositing a corpse 'upena —fishing net ' - from wehewehe.org HAUN & ASSOCIATES 141 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No. 1231-081022 REFERENCES Apple, R. 1987 "History of the Hawaiian Volcano Observatory", USGS Professional Paper 1350. U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, CA. Barrera, W. 1989 Archaeological Reconnaissance, TMK: 8-9-06:5, Kapua, South Kona, Hawai'i. 1995 Honomalino, South Kona, Hawai'i Island: Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK: 8-9-05:4 Beamer, Kamanamaikalani 2014 No Makou Ka Mana Liberating a Nation. Kamehameha Publishing 2014, Honolulu, HI. Borthwick, D., R. Chiogioji, B. Colin, and H. Hammatt 1997 Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 7-acre Parcel at Pahoehoe, Hawai'i (TMK: 7-7-08:20, 31, and 100). Cultural Surveys Hawai'i report prepared for Mr. John Kingman. Chinen, Jon J. 1958 The Great Mahele: Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. University of Hawai'i Press. Clark, J.R.K 2001 Hawaii Place Names: Shores, Beaches and Surf Sites. University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu. DLNR (Department of Land and Natural Resources) 2003 Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources, State Historic Preservation Division. FR n.d. Foreign Register of Kuleana Claims Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. FT n.d. Foreign Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. Farber & Associates 2011 Environmental Assessment, Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Miloli'i, Ho'opuloa, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i, Hawai'i Section 106 Analysis and Cultural Impact Assessment prepared for Pa'a Pono Miloli'i Fornander, A. 1885 An Account of the Polynesian Race, its Origins and Migrations, and the Ancient History of the Polynesian People to the Times of Kamehameha I. Vol. II. Trubner, London. Giambelluca, T., Q. Chen, A. Frazier, J. Price, Y. Chen, P.S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M. Delparte 2013 Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai'i. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 142 TMK:(3)8-9-r)04:001 Report No. 1231-081022 Groza, R., D. Shideler and H. Hammatt 2010 Archaeological Inventory Survey Report for the Proposed South Kona Irrigation Project, Papa 1 and 2, Anapuka, Ho'opuloa, Miloli'i, Omoka'a, Kalihi, Honomalino and Kapu'a Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Hawai'l Island, TMK: (3) 8-8-16:23; 8-9-01:2, 19 & 20; 8-9-02:12 & 14, and 8-9-13:27. Cultural Surveys Hawaii Report prepared for Belt Collins Hawai'i, Ltd. Hammatt, H.H 1980 Letter Report: Archaeological Reconnaissance of a House Lot, Kapua Bay, Hawai'i, TMK: 8-9-06:5, ARCH, Lawai, Kauai. Handy, E.S.C. and E.G. Handy 1972 Native Planters in Old Hawaii. B.P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 233. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu (with M.K. Pukui). Haun, A. and A. Walker 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Farms of Kapua, Mauka Lands Project Area, land of Kapua, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i (TMK: 3-8-9-06: Por. 3, 19), PHRI. Hilo, HI. Haun, A. and D. Henry 2013 Archaeological Inventory Survey, TMK: (3) 8-8-016: 012, 013, 035, 036 AND 037, Land of Papa 2, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. Haun & Associates report 869-042413 prepared for TGUH11, LLC, Kailua- Kona, HI. 2015 Archaeological Inventory Survey, TMK: (3) 8-8-009:141, Papa 2 Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. Haun & Associates report 960 prepared for Miloli'i Beach Club Association 11. 2018 Archaeological Site Preservation Plan, Sites 50-10-65-4845, 28991, 30104, and 30105, Papa 2 Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. TMK: (3) 8-8-009:141. Haun & Associates report 960 prepared for Miloli'i Beach Club Association 11. Hibbard, D. 1993 Historic Preservation Field Inspection of Historic Sites Complex at Papa Bay and Recommendations for Restoration of Damaged Sites at the Complex Papa 2, South Kona, Hawai'i Island TMK: 8-8-09: 141, Lot 162. Log No. 9179, Doc. No. 9307hm01 prepared for Virginia Goldstein, Planning Department, County of Hawai'i. 1'i, J.P. 1959 Fragment of Hawaiian History. Bishop Museum Special Publication 70. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Indices 1929 Indices of Awards Made by the Board of Land Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Territory of Hawai'i, Honolulu. Kamakau, S.M. 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Kinney, H. W. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 143 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - r) 0 4 : 0 0 1 Report No. 1231-081022 1913 The Island of Hawaii. Hicks -Judd Company, San Francisco Loomis, H. 1976 Tsunami Wave Runups Heights in Hawai'i. Hawai'i Institute of Geophysics, University of Hawai'i, Honolulu, and Pacific Marine Environmental Research Laboratories, NOAA. Maly, K. and O. Maly 2002 Kipahoehoe ma Kapalilua, Kona Hema: A Cultural Study of Kipahoehoe and Neighboring Lands in Kapalilua, South Kona. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, HI. 2003 He Wahi Mo'olelo No Na Lawai'a Ma Kapalilua, Kona Hema, Hawai'i: A Collection of Historical Accounts and Oral History Interviews with Elder Kama'aina Fisher -people from the Kapalilua Region of South Kona, Island of Hawaii. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, HI. 2004 He Mo'olelo Aina: A Cultural Study of the Manuka Natural Area Reserve Lands of Manuka, District of Ka'u and Kaulanamauna, District of Kona, Island of Hawaii. Kumu Pono Associates, Hilo, HI. Moffat, R. M. and G.L. Kirkpatrick 1995 Surveying the Mahele: Mapping the Hawaiian Land Revolution. Palapala'dina. Editions Limited, Honolulu. NR n.d. Native Register of Kuleana Claims Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. NT n.d. Native Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984 Preliminary Project Assessment for the Development of the Miloli'i Community, State Parks Division. Pa'a Pono Miloli'i website 2019 http:Hpaaponomilolii.org Pukui, Mary Kawena, Samuel H. Elbert and Esther T. Mo'okini 1974 Place Names of Hawaii. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Rechtman, R. 2000 An Archaeological Survey of a Roughly 40 X 40 foot area in an Orchard on Mac Farms of Hawaii, Inc property in Kapua Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. Rechtman Consulting, Kea'au, HI. Reinecke,J. 1930 Archaeology of Kona. Ms on file Dept. of Anthropology, Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Robins, J., J. Collins, H. Hammatt, T. Barr, H. Ballard and M. Heidel HAUN & ASSOCIATES 144 T M K : ( 3 ) 8 - 9 - r) 0 4 : 0 0 1 Deport No. 1231-081022 1994 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of an approximately 1260-acre subject parcel in the ahupua'a of Kapu'a, South Kona District, island of Hawai'i (TMK: 8-9-06:por. 3). Cultural Surveys Hawai'i, Kailua, HI. Rosendahl, P. 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Farms of Kapua Project Area, Land of Kapua, South Kona, island of Hawai'i, Ms. 73-120782, PHRI, Hilo, HI. 1984 Addendum Report: Additional Archaeological Input, Environmental Impact Statement Preparation, with M. Kaschko and M. Allen, Ms. 73-120782, PHRI, Hilo, HI. 2006 Archaeological Assessment Survey and Cultural Assessment Study, South Kona Watershed Irrigation System Project, lands of Papa to Kaulanamauna, South Kona District, island of Hawaii. PHRI, Hilo, HI. Sato, H.H., E.W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, R. Smythe and M. Takehiro Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii. U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawai'i Agricultural Experiment Station. Washington D.C. Government Printing Office. Scheffler T. 2012 Draft Historic Preservation Plan for Rock Wall (SIHP # 50-10-66-28991) located on TMK (3) 8-8-01:020, Papa VY and 2"d Ahupua'a, South Kona, Hawai'i island. Geohazards Consultants International, Inc. report prepared for Barbara Polumbo. Scheffler T., J. Lockwood and L. Sumner 2012 Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK: (3) 8-8-01:310, Papa 15Y and 211 Ahupua'a, South Kona, Hawaii island. Geohazards Consultants International, Inc. report prepared for Barbara Polumbo. Speakman, C.E., Jr. 1978 An Informal History of the Hawaiian Island. San Rafael: Pueo Press. Soehren, L.J. 1988 Letter Report: Archaeological Reconnaissance, TMK: 8-9-06:5, Kapua, South Kona, Hawai'i. Stokes J.F.G and T. Dye 1991 Heiau of the Island of Hawaii: A Historic Survey of Native Temple Sites. Edited by Tom Dye, Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu Thrum, T.G. 1908 Heiaus and Heiau Sites Throughout the Hawaiian Islands, island of Hawai'i. The Recognized Book of Authentic Information on Hawaii, Combined with Thrum's Hawaiian Annual and Standard Guide 38-47, Honolulu Star -Bulletin, Honolulu. The Hawaiian University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library 2019 www.magis.manoa.hawaii.edu HAUN & ASSOCIATES 145 TMK:(3)8-9-004:001 Report No. 1231-081022 U.S. Climate Data website 2019 www.usclimatedata.com Waihona'Aina Corporation 2000 The Mahele Database, waihona.com. Watson, T., and J. Farber 2012 Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Miloli'i, Ho'6puloa, South Kona District, Island of Hawai'i, Hawai'i Section 106 Analysis and Cultural Impact Assessment prepared for Pa'a Pono Miloli'i Wehewehe.org 2019 Hawai'i Electronic Library - Na Puke Wehewehe '61elo Hawaii Wolfe, E. and J. Morris 2001 Geological Map of the Island of Hawai'i. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S Geological Survey. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 146 APPENDIX C SHORELINE CERTIFICATION MAP SE-0P ;!4 DAVIDY.IGE GOVERNOR OF HAWAIParid t ti STATE OF HAWAII s Of DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 October 31, 2019 Austin, Tsutsumi & Associates, Inc. 501 Sumner Street, Suite 521 Honolulu, Hawaii 96817 Dear Applicant: Subject: Transmittal of Signed Shoreline Certification Maps Owner(s): State of Hawaii Tax Map Key: (3) 8-9-004:001 SUZANNE D. CASE CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT INECEHE NOV 0 41019 r USTIN, TSUTSUMI & ASSUMES, INC. Honolulu, Hawaii 96817-5031 File No.: HA-578 Enclosed please find two (2) copies of the certified shoreline survey map for the subject property. If you have any questions, please feel free to call us at (808) 587-0424. Thank you. E Shoreline DiWsition Specialist Enclosures cc: DAGS HDLO wwrws.311.19 �M I OCT 3 � t019^• IN ........ nsua+Er[0. . OC s, z0ia I SHORELINE CERTIFICATION MAP OF MI.GUI BEACH PARK 0 SCrHEOE NOLCRANi N AUNDA5 AND y9 Nw xEjl PA �� I POa1 ON NOEUTH AN TIH. 5 OF (3) w � a� eu9 OOI 001 a. w r� F School G—t 8, A ana �� \ �� • TM ..�w� IWS ASSESSMENT AND FEASIBILITY STUDY FOR MILOLI `I BEACH PARK Kahuku, Ka`u, Hawaii TMK: (3) 8-9-04:001 August 2020 Prepared For: Department of Parks & Recreation County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Prepared By: Bow EngineeringA�& Development, Inc. Civil Engineering Maiming 1953 South Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, Hawaii 96826 Telephone: (808) 941-8853 Fax: (808) 945-9299 www.bowengineering.com Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVESUMMARY...........................................................................................................3 PROJECT LOCATION & DESCRIPTION...............................................................................4 EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM......................................................................................5 WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION.....................................................................................7 MARINEASSESSMENT............................................................................................................7 MARINE WATER QUALITY AND SITE OBSERVATIONS..................................................8 GROUND WATER LOCATIONS (SALINITY AND PH INVESTIGATION) .........................8 WATER QUALITY MONITORING (ENTEROCOCCUS SAMPLING)................................10 ENTEROCOCCUS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION................................................................21 ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM..................................................24 IWS CONDITION ASSESSMENT....................................................................................................24 Photo1 - Septic Inflow...........................................................................................................24 Photo2 - Septic Outflow........................................................................................................24 DYE TEST OBSERVATION............................................................................................................25 DISCUSSION OF WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION & IWS ASSESSMENT ..........27 WASTEWATER SYSTEM OPTIONS.....................................................................................28 OPTION 1 — HOLDING SYSTEM....................................................................................................28 OptionIA: Holding Tank.......................................................................................................29 Option 1B: Evaporative Toilet System..................................................................................32 Option 1C: Prefabricated Waterless Restroom......................................................................35 OPTION 2 — IWS TREATED COLLECTION SYSTEM.......................................................................37 Option 2A: Anua BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofllter................................................................38 Option 213: BioBarrier High Strength Membrane BioReactor (HSMBR 1.5) .......................41 Option 2C: Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System (M1200)..............................................44 DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM OPTIONS.......................................................................47 TREATED EFFLUENT DISPOSAL...................................................................................................49 CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS............................................................................50 REFERENCES............................................................................................................................51 ATTACHMENTS........................................................................................................................51 Feasibility Study Page 2 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. has been contracted by the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation to analyze the beachfront water, assess the existing individual wastewater system (IWS), and provide recommendations for wastewater treatment options to reduce the bacteria output to beach park waters from the existing restroom facilities located at Miloli`i Beach Park in Kahuku, Ka`u on Hawaii Island. Water Quality Investigation: Marine water samples were collected at five different locations at Miloli'i Beach Park between March 9, 2020 and March 11, 2020 at both high and low tides and tested for enterococcus levels. Samples from Location B (near the entrance to the beach park and pavilion) were found to have the highest enterococcus levels which exceeded the limit for recreation waters. Location D (shallow marine cove fronting the beach park) was predicted to have the highest bacteria levels due to its proximity to the existing leach field. However, samples from Location D were found to have the lowest enterococcus levels, well below the limits allowed for recreational waters. A dye test originating at the comfort station's septic tank was performed to trace effluent through the system. If the effluent and dye reached the ground water table, it was expected that the dye would be present in marine waters surrounding the beach park. No dye was observed in the adjacent marine waters through the investigation period and beach park users did not report observing any dye in the days following the investigation period. IWS Condition Assessment: The site investigation and assessment done on March 10, 2020 found that the inflow side of the septic tank was full of solids filled to the invert of the inlet pipe. The outflow side of the septic tank was also full, with a liquid level at the outlet pipe invert. Effluent levels were observed to be normal, however the walls of the septic tank risers showed indication of overloading where effluent levels approached the bottom of the tank lid. Recommendations: Based on the findings from the water quality investigation and existing IWS condition assessment, three (3) options were considered. However, at this time, Option 1 is recommended based on the results of the Water Quality Investigation, dye test and the IWS capacity for normal day-to-day flows. Option 1 is to keep the existing IWS. Based on the Water Quality Investigation findings, it appears that the existing IWS is sufficient for handling normal day-to-day flows. It is recommended that further investigation (e.g. during high usage periods) and increasing the frequency of pumping (e.g. from once every three months to once a month) be considered. This will help determine if the existing IWS is functioning properly during high usage periods and determine an approximate high usage population. Feasibility Study Page 3 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. PROJECT LOCATION & DESCRIPTION The project site is located in Kahuku, Ka`u in the Miloli'i Beach Park on Hawaii Island. The project site is adjacent to a residential property to the west and a church to the east. The project site consists of camping sites (capacity of 22 people), basketball/volleyball court, pavilion, picnic areas with seating, parking area and a comfort station. The beach park is used by the nearby Miloli'i community residents, a charter school, campers, and visitors. The beach park comfort station includes a total of four toilets and two sinks. The existing facilities are treated by a 1,250- gallon septic tank and is then discharged into an absorption bed. A high-water table is a concern due to the proximity of the site to the ocean during high tides and the occurrence of rainfall events. UT I �o I SRALLCA POKD- PACIFIC -/ OCEAN /BAA EXIST. SEPTIC TANK EXIST- ABSORPTION BED ED CESSPOOL EXIST. COMFORT/ STATION Figure]. Miloh'i Beach Park Location Feasibility Study Page 4 of 124 Miloli'i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM The existing comfort station currently has two bathrooms, each with two toilets and one sink for a total of four toilets and two sinks. According to as -built plans provided by the Department of Health, the existing IWS system consists of a 1,250-gallon traffic rated septic tank that discharges to an absorption field. The absorption field is approximately 45-feet long by 12-feet wide. The existing IWS system was completed and approved by DOH in December 2006. The completion of the IWS replaced an abandoned cesspool located between the comfort station and the absorption bed. See Attachment 1 for the as -built plans. Per DOH guidelines, an estimated flow of 25 gallons/capita for "Camps with flush toilets, no showers" was used to back calculate the approximate usage the existing system was sized for. Based on the existing septic tank size of 1,200 gallons, it can be assumed that the existing system was size for a population of approximately 50 people per day. Based on the calculations, the existing system is sized to handle the estimated weekday use. However, there is potential that the system is undersized for the estimated increased weekend use. The comfort station usage fluctuates throughout the week. An estimated usage during the weekdays range from 10-30 people per day and estimated usage during the weekends range from 50-100 people per day. Residents indicated the septic tank is full and needs to be pumped after large weekend gatherings. The septic tank is pumped every three months and it is noted that the septic tank is always full prior to pumping. Concerns have been raised by neighboring residences that treated effluent being discharged into the ocean due to the proximity of the site may not be treated well enough. The existing system may potentially be undersized to handle the higher usage during the weekends causing the system to push out effluent faster than required to properly treat it. It should be noted Hawaii County Department of Parks and Recreation has no records of wastewater spills. To address the concern, Bow Engineering was contracted by Hawaii County Department of Parks and Recreation to assess the water quality of the nearby beach area and the findings were documented in the Water Quality sections of this report. If the existing system is found to be inadequate and an upgraded system needs to be installed to properly treat effluent, this feasibility study will explore alternative options. Physical limitations of the site which provide design challenges include shallow depth to groundwater and limited space available. The current septic tank is situated between the comfort station, basketball court and two cypress pine trees. It should be noted that DOH has no records of any IWS records for the neighboring church located across of Miloli'i Road or for any of the nearby residences. These unknown existing systems may also impact the ground water system and contribute to the concerns raised as the level of treatment for these systems is unclear. Feasibility Study Page 5 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Figure 2. Existing Septic Tank Site Figure 3. Existing Absorption Field Site Feasibility Study Page 6 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION MARINE ASSESSMENT The marine assessment around Miloli'i Beach Park (MBP) involved a two-part study: 1. Visual site inspection and water quality monitoring (salinity and pH) around near shore waters. 2. Water sample collection at sites affected by groundwater (fresh or brackish) as determined by salinity/pH. These water samples were to be collected at high and low tides over a three-day period and analyzed for enterococcus, a human -specific waste bacterium. Based on previous studies and interviews with local residents, MBP is highly influenced by groundwater sources. Residents who use the beach park for recreational beach activities have expressed concerns over water quality, particularly high bacteria levels due to illness and infection experienced periodically by beach -users. The monitoring protocol for this assessment were designed by Dr. Paul Bienfang (Marine Biologist, Analytical Services, LLQ and Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Bacteria and pathogen contaminations in the ocean are hypothesized to be entering the marine environment through groundwater inputs, due to the volcanic geology in the area. Identifying the possible sources of ground water contaminants would be the most likely locations of elevated pathogen levels in the marine environment. The surrounding community has varying levels of wastewater treatment ranging from cesspools (no treatment) to individual wastewater systems (IWS) with leach field disposal (treated with septic tanks). Each IWS may have varying levels of treatment which are determined through permitting with the Department of Health — Waste Water Branch. At MBP, a septic tank treats effluent from a comfort stations (4 toilets and 2 sinks) prior to disposal to the adjacent leach field. The leach field is approximately 50 yards from the shore and is likely influenced by groundwater (brackish and marine) depending on tides. There are two structures near MBP: a community church and a private resident (see Table 2 for relative locations). The level of wastewater treatment is unknown at these facilities. Although no one observed to be occupying the residence or using the church, any water usage at these facilities could possibly contribute to groundwater contamination at various locations around the beach park. The highest probability of detecting ground water in the near shore waters would be at the interface of groundwater -marine locations. To detect these locations, salinity and pH were monitored along the coast using a continuous monitoring probe with GPS capability. Decreases in salinity and pH would identify ground water sources (fresh/brackish water). These locations would be mapped and used for water sampling for enterococcus. Marine water with ground water influence would be sampled for enterococcus which may be contaminating the ground water (through cesspools and leach fields) prior to entering the ocean. Due to the negligible beach use at the time of this study, direct contamination by humans using the nearshore waters could be excluded as a potential source of bacterial coliforms. Feasibility Study Page 7 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; MARINE WATER QUALITY AND SITE OBSERVATIONS At the site visit on March 9, 2020, Kua o ka La New Century Public Charter School described some research that is ongoing around MBP. Students at the school routinely perform visual and analytical marine studies of the near shore marine waters, particularly for environmental DNA studies. The students and teachers were able to describe some general locations of where brackish water were found in the area, including some freshwater ponds located in properties mauka of the beach park. The areas described by the school matched the areas where our investigation detected groundwater. They described two locations that they monitor that have ground water influence. We were able to find two additional locations that was also worth including as a sampling area. More will be discussed in the subsequent section of the investigation and results. The waters surrounding MBP were very clear with an abundance of fish and coral. The small coves and tide pools were teeming with fish, crabs, hermit crabs, and sea cucumbers. Visually, there were no indications of external contamination caused by pollution or other sources. Several groups were observed to visit the beach park, only a few people entered the water and only waded in the sandy areas and did not get in deeper than knee -depth. The comfort station did experience a fair amount of activity, although specific observations were not recorded to determine the actual water usage (sink versus toilet use). It was difficult to visually see any fresh/brackish water entering the coastal waters. Zones of mixing were not apparent and there were no signs of algae or floral growth that support freshwater mixing. After using the probe to measure salinity and pH throughout the site, small "springs" were observed flowing into the ocean. These were only observed at low tide; at mid to high tides, the "springs" were concealed by the wash of the waves or incoming tide levels. GROUND WATER LOCATIONS (SALINITY AND PH INVESTIGATION) To detect ground water in the coastal waters, water quality monitoring personnel calibrated salinity and pH probes prior to entering the water (see Table 1 for equipment specifications). The probes were then towed through the near shore waters (within six feet from shore) to measure for decreases in salinity and pH. Salinity was used as the primary detection for groundwater with pH used as a secondary detection method. In general, the water being monitored was less than two feet deep. Approx. Min. Min. Parameter Equipment* Unit Error Method Detectable/ Sensitivity/ range Resolution YSI ProDSS-1 °C or 0.1 Temperature Temperature °C f0.2 °C SM 2550B -5 to 50 °C O F Sensor Probe YSI ProDSS-1 f1.0% of SM 2520 Salinity Salinity Probe PPT reading or Salinity 0 to 70 ppt 0.01 ppt Sensor f0.1 ppt PH YSI ProDSS-1 pH standard f0.2 pH SM 4500- 0 to 14 pH 0.01 pH units Sensor Probe units units H+ units *All sensor probes will be housed in a YSI ProDSS-4 port cable assembly which will be connected to a YSI ProDSS-1 meter • ppt parts per thousand Table 1. Monitoring Parameters and Equipment Feasibility Study Page 8 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; The salinity of deeper water around MBP were found to be typical of ocean water (34 — 36 ppt). The salinity dropped to around 30 — 32 ppt along the near shore waters and show the influence of groundwater. As the source of groundwater was approached the salinity was observed to drop quickly to 20 — 25 ppt before the source was identified at the lowest measured salinity 13 — 15 ppt. The areas identified at low tide on March 9, 2020 are shown in the map below. Table 2. Salinity investigation and results Four distinct areas were identified (A, B, C, D) with a fifth (B-Freshwater) and sixth (E) area added during enterococcus sampling. The additional area, B-Freshwater, was found to be brackish water (15-20 ppt) adjacent to, and mauka of the road from sample area "B". During enterococcus sampling, the salinity probe was used to locate any variation in groundwater outlets detected previously determined; this is how area E was identified. The GPS location of the monitoring Feasibility Study Page 9 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; location was pinned using the probe meter. All GPS locations described in this report are pinned to the instrument meter and not the actual location of the monitoring probes. WATER QUALITY MONITORING (ENTEROCOCCUS SAMPLING) On March 9, 2020, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis for enterococcus. Samples from A, C, and D were collected in areas near the low salinity locations detected during the preliminary site investigation. The tide was high at the time of sample collection, differing from the salinity investigation, which took place at low tide. The tidal change also redirected ground water flow to slightly different output locations. At the afternoon high tide (1.6 ft), the samples were taken between 3:50 — 4:20 PM. The salinity probe was used to identify the closest point of groundwater mixing with the marine environment for optimum groundwater and enterococcus detection. Noon 9 Mar 5f 3f ------------------------- Figure 3. Tide chart for March 9, 2020 sampling at high tide. Location B's groundwater source was imperceptible at high tide; however, it was observed that brackish water was present on the mauka side of the road to the beach park in the general vicinity of B. This water was originally thought to be tidally influenced, marine in origin, and therefore have a high salinity (34 — 36 ppt). However, the salinity was brackish and between 16 — 17 ppt. The elevated tide seems to be pushing the brackish ground water up to the surface. This location was sampled as "Location B — Fresh Water". Near location D, a second location was sampled as "Location E". This sample was taken in a small tidal pool near D, which had a slight drop in salinity. The exact location of this sample location is shown in the tables below. Feasibility Study Page 10 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. MARCH 9, 2020 — HIGH TIDE LOCATION A LATITUDE (°N) 19.18307 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90698 SALINITY (PPT) 15.4 pH 7.9 LOCATION B LATITUDE (°N) N/A LONGITUDE (°W) N/A SALINITY (PPT) N/A pH N/A LOCATION C LATITUDE (°N) 19.18244 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90741 SALINITY (PPT) 32.3 pH 8.11 LOCATION D LATITUDE (°N) 19.18212 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90807 SALINITY (PPT) 33.7 pH 8.13 Not available due to undetectable groundwater source during high tide sampling event. Table 4. March 9, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling. Feasibility Study Page 11 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. MARCH 9, 2020 — HIGH TIDE LOCATION B — FRESH WATER Brackish Monitorin water LATITUDE (°N) 19.18259 probe an Mauka of sample road LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90704 location Road SALINITY (PPT) 16.5 z lead-ing 1 v t into beach pH 7.56�12aaQ Table 4. March 9, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling at Fresh Water Location. MARCH 9, 2020 — HIGH TIDE LOCATION E LATITUDE (°N) 19.18212 ++ LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90807 SALINITY (PPT) 33.7 pH 8.13 Table 5. March 9, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling at Fresh Water Location. The enterococcus analytical results are presented in the table below and will be discussed further in later sections of this report. These results are presented in Most Probable Number or MPN, and for the purpose of this report will be abbreviated as 9 and will be filled in by the numerical value, when available, as a unit of concentration (per 100 mL). Miloli'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) March 9, 2020 Day 1 Location 9 / 100 mL Ei x A 173 B-Freshwater 368 C 51 D 10 E 0 Table 6. March 9, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results. Feasibility Study Page 12 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; On March 10, 2020, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis of enterococcus at two tidal events during the day. At the morning high tide, samples from A, B, B-Freshwater, C, and D were taken between 6:45 — 7:15 AM. The tide was at 1.5 ft during this monitoring event. The highest morning tide was at 4:45 AM and measured at 2.2 ft, however it was not practical to collect water samples at this time. The samples were collected in areas near the low salinity locations detected during the preliminary site investigation. The salinity probe was used to identify the closest point of groundwater mixing with the marine environment for optimum groundwater and enterococcus detection. The exact sample locations are shown in the tables below. Figure 5. Tide chart for March 10, 2020 sampling at high tide. Table 7. March 10, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling at Fresh Water Location. Feasibility Study Page 13 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; MARCH 10, 2020 — HIGH TIDE LOCATION A LATITUDE (°N) 19.18299 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90704 SALINITY (PPT) 16.7 pH 7.41 LOCATION B LATITUDE (°N) 19.18254 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90707 SALINITY (PPT) 18.1 pH 7.15 LOCATION C LATITUDE (°N) 19.18245 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90746 SALINITY (PPT) 25.9 pH 7.71 LOCATION D LATITUDE (°N) 19.18213 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90805 SALINITY (PPT) 21.3 pH 7.76 Table 8. March 10, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling. Feasibility Study Page 14 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; At low tide, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis of enterococcus. This sample set was collected in the late morning between 11:10 — 11:25 AM. The tide was at -0.1 ft during this monitoring event and coincided with the lowest tide of the day at 11:05 AM. The samples were collected from A, B, C, and D in areas very close to those identified during the preliminary site investigation. The salinity probe was used to identify the closest point of groundwater mixing with the marine environment, however at sites A, B, and D, water was actively observed to be flowing out of the sand and rocks with no tidal influence. The exact sample locations are shown in the table on the following page. 5ft e10Mar Figure 6. Tide chart for March 10, 2020 sampling at low tide. The enterococcus analytical results are presented in the table below and will be discussed further in later sections of this report. These results are presented in Most Probable Number or MPN, and for the purpose of this report will be abbreviated as 9 and will be filled in by the numerical value, when available, as a unit of concentration (per 100 mL). Miloh'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) March 10, 2020 Day 2 Location # / 100 mL Day 2 Location 9 / 100 mL x A 63 A 30 B 269 B 120 B-Freshwater 305 C 256 C 10 D 0 D 0 D - Replicate 0 Table 9. March 10, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results. Feasibility Study Page 15 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. MARCH 10, 2020 — LOW TIDE LOCATION A LATITUDE (°N) 19.18316 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90704 SALINITY (PPT) 13.6 pH 7.24 LOCATION B LATITUDE (°N) 19.18255 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90714 SALINITY (PPT) 12.6 pH 7.11 LOCATION C LATITUDE (°N) 19.18245 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90739 SALINITY (PPT) 15.7 pH 7.89 LOCATION D LATITUDE (°N) 19.1822 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90791 SALINITY (PPT) 8.2 pH 8.08 give 1" a... _ . ,. ..` a: Table 10. March 10, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling. Feasibility Study Page 16 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; On March 11, 2020, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis for enterococcus at two tidal events during the day. At the morning high tide, samples from A, B, B-Freshwater, C, and D were taken between 6:45 — 7:00 AM. The tide was at 1.6 ft during this monitoring event. The highest morning tide was at 5:19 AM and measured at 1.9 ft, however it was not practical to collect water samples at this time. The samples were collected in areas near the low salinity locations detected during the preliminary site investigation. The salinity probe was used to identify the closest point of groundwater mixing with the marine environment for optimum groundwater and enterococcus detection. The exact location of this sample location is shown in the tables below. 1'x'MMINAM Figure 7. Tide chart for March 11, 2020 sampling at high tide. Table IL March 11, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling at Fresh Water Location. Feasibility Study Page 17 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; MARCH 11, 2020 — HIGH TIDE LOCATION A LATITUDE (°N) 19.18254 LONGITUDE (°W) 155. 90707 SALINITY (PPT) 20.8 pH 7.42 LOCATION B LATITUDE (°N) 19.1825 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90694 SALINITY (PPT) 16.3 pH 7.05 LOCATION C LATITUDE (°N) 19.18246 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90746 SALINITY (PPT) 27.9 pH 7.72 LOCATION D LATITUDE (°N) 19.18213 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.9085 SALINITY (PPT) 29.1 pH 7.81 Table 12. March 11, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling. Feasibility Study Page 18 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. At low tide, water samples were collected for laboratory analysis of enterococcus. This sample set was collected in the late morning between 11: 10 — 11:20 AM. The tide was at -0.2 ft during this monitoring event and was taken just before the lowest tide of the day at 11:41 AM. The samples were collected from A, B, C, and D in areas very close to those identified during the preliminary site investigation. The salinity probe was used to identify the closest point of groundwater mixing with the marine environment, however at sites A, B, and D, water was actively observed to be flowing out of the sand and rocks with no tidal influence. The exact location of this sample location is shown in the table below. Wid 11 Mar Figure 8. Tide chart for March 11, 2020 sampling at low tide. The enterococcus analytical results are presented in the table below and will be discussed further in later sections of this report. These results are presented in Most Probable Number or MPN, and for the purpose of this report will be abbreviated as # and will be filled in by the numerical value, when available, as a unit of concentration (per 100 mL). Miloh'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) March 11, 2020 Day 3 Location # / 100 mL Day 3 Location # / 100 mL xRP A 41 A 74 B 146 B 266 B-Freshwater 243 C 275 C 20 D 10 D 10 D-Replicate 10 Table 13. March 11, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results. Feasibility Study Page 19 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; MARCH 11, 2020 — LOW TIDE LOCATION A LATITUDE (°N) 19.18316 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90706 SALINITY (PPT) 13.6 pH 7.23 LOCATION B LATITUDE (°N) 19.18256 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90714 SALINITY (PPT) 13.1 pH 7.12 LOCATION C LATITUDE (°N) 19.18246 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90744 SALINITY (PPT) 15.8 pH 7.78 LOCATION D LATITUDE (°N) 19.18223 LONGITUDE (°W) 155.90794 SALINITY (PPT) 18.5 pH 8.06 Table 14. March 11, 2020 Enterococcus Sampling. Feasibility Study Page 20 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; ENTEROCOCCUS RESULTS AND DISCUSSION The tables below summarize the water quality investigation results for enterococcus at each location. The data tables are color -coded green and yellow, for high and low tides, respectively. The bacteria quantities are presented as the number of colonies per 100 mL of sample. The average concentrations are shown in the last line of each table. Bacterial concentrations greater than 130 per 100 mL exceed the recommended limits for recreational water uses. Location A is the north most monitoring area and is furthest from the beach park. The local residents have commented that this is a known "spring" that people use to rinse off. During the sample collection on the second day (March 10), a resident was collecting buckets of water from this area to use to wash his boat. In general, the results were relatively consistent. The first day detected the greatest bacteria concentration of 173 per 100 mL. The remaining days' samples were between 30 — 74 per 100 mL and were below the recommended bacterial concentration threshold. Miloli'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) c a Date 9 / 100 mL 3/9/2020 173 3/10/2020 63 3/10/2020 30 3/11/2020 41 3/11/2020 74 x = 76 Table 15. March 9 11, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results at Location A. Location B is in the corner opposite of "A" and is near the entrance of the beach park near the pavilion. The source of groundwater was not found at high tide on March 9t'; therefore, no sample was taken. The enterococcus concentrations were very high and exceeded the 130 per 100 mL in all samples except the sample taken on March 10t' at low tide (120 per 100 mL). At high tide, B-Freshwater had water available for sampling on the mauka side of the beach park access road. At low tide, this water source was dry. The concentrations were highest from B- Freshwater. This ditch had an average bacteria level of 305 per 100 mL and is nearly triple the limit for recreational waters. Comparison of the values taken at high tide from B and B-Freshwater shows that B has a significant reduction in bacteria. This is likely due to dilution once the groundwater from B-Freshwater reaches the ocean and is diluted by salt water. The lowest salinity was determined prior to sample collection for enterococcus to ensure the sample had the most ground water possible in each sample. The groundwater in this area (B and B-Freshwater) was determined to be significantly contaminated with enterococcus during this monitoring period. Feasibility Study Page 21 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; Miloli'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) ,o Date 9 / 100 mL 3/10/2020 269 3/10/2020 120 3/11/2020 146 3/11/2020 266 x = 200 Miloli'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) Date 4 / 100 mL 3/9/2020 368 a 3/10/2020 305 243 a3/11/20201 x = 305 Table 16. March 9 11, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results at Location Band B-Freshwater. The samples taken at Location C were taken just below the pavilion wall near the mid -point of the pavilion. The counts were relatively low at high tide (between 10 and 51 per 100 mL). This is likely due to significant dilution since the water was about 2 feet deep. At low tide, ground water could be observed to be flowing out of the rocks and therefore would be more concentrated ground water samples. At low tide the enterococcus concentration was between 256 and 275 per 100 mL and are above the threshold for recreational waters. The groundwater in this area was determined to be significantly contaminated with enterococcus during this monitoring period. Miloli'i Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) U 0 a Date 4 / 100 mL 3/9/2020 51 3/10/2020 10 3/10/2020 256 3/11/2020 20 3/11/2020 275 x = 122 Table 17. March 9 11, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results at Location C. Location D was a shallow marine cove fronting the beach park. This area seemed to be the most used by recreational beach visitors. Virtually no enterococcus was measured at this location. An extra sample was taken near Location D on the first day due to a low salinity pocket detected about 20 feet away from where the Location D sample was taken; this sample had no enterococcus detected. Two replicate samples were taken on March 10 and 11 as a quality control check. Both samples came back identical to the normal grab sample taken showing both the sampling and analytical methods were performed without detectable error. Feasibility Study Page 22 of 124 Miloli'i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; WON Water Quality Investigation Analysis method: IDEXX (E.Cocci) A 0 c Date # / 100 mL 3/9/2020 10 3/9/2020 0 Extra 3/10/2020 0 3/10/2020 0 3/10/2020 0 Replicate 3/11/2020 10 3/11/2020 10 3/11/2020 10 Replicate X= 5 Table 18. March 9 11, 2020 Enterococcus laboratory analysis results at Location D. P igure 9. Lnterococcus sampling and results Feasibility Study Page 23 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; ASSESSMENT OF EXISTING WASTEWATER SYSTEM IWS CONDITION ASSESSMENT A site investigation and assessment of the existing IWS was conducted on March 10, 2020. The configuration of the IWS was confirmed with the as-builts of the system that was provided by the County and DOH. The septic tank covers were opened and observed. The inflow side of the septic tank was full of solids filled to the invert or base of the inlet pipe. The outflow side of the septic tank was full with a liquid level at the outlet pipe invert or base. Although the effluent levels in the septic tank were observed to be normal, the walls of the septic tank risers indicate the tank is overloaded where the effluent and liquid layer fill to the bottom of the lid. The consistency of the effluent in the inflow septic tank does not appear typical. The inflow septic tank was observed to be filled with thick sludge. The outflow septic tank liquid appeared to have more than typical amount of scum. The liquid should have less scum and be clearer. It was also observed that the inflow septic tank baffle pipe was clogged. The outflow septic tank baffle pipe was observed to have a plug whereas the inflow baffle pipe did not. Refer to photographs below. Photo 1 - Septic Inflow Photo 2 Septic Outflow There was water observed on the men's bathroom floor but seemed to be a result of campers filling large water containers. Restroom fixtures did not back up when toilets flushed, or sinks turned on. The leach field distribution box and inspection ports were not inspected because both were unable to be opened. The surface of the leach field did not show any signs of failure such as effluent or wet spots on the leach field surface, greener vegetation growth over the leach field surface or noticeable odors. Feasibility Study Page 24 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. DYE TEST OBSERVATION A dye test was performed originating at the septic tank for the park's comfort station. Approximately 0.5 gallons of concentrated red tracer dye was added directly to the second chamber of the septic tank on March 10, 2020. This quantity of dye was calculated to treat 6,000 gallons of effluent and still be detectable to the human eye. The effluent would carry the dye through the leach field. If the effluent and dye reached the groundwater table, then the dye was expected to manifest in the marine waters fronting (or surrounding) the beach park. MARCH 10 — 11, 2020 — DYE TEST IN SEPTIC SYSTEM Table 19. Dye Test Photographs The photographs on the following page show the site investigation performed over the course of two days at the beach park. In general, the site appeared to be in good surface condition. No major cracking was observed around the septic tank casings and access covers. No ponding or Feasibility Study Page 25 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; depressions were observed, both of which may indicate failure of the treatment and disposal system. The first chamber of the septic tank was observed to be very full of solids; the picture was not included in this report. It is recommended that the septic tank be pumped regularly to remove solids and to allow for better function out of the existing IWS. The second row of pictures show images taken from the second chamber before and after the dye was added. The photograph on the left was taken before the dye and the photograph on the right was taken after the dye was added. The effluent turned a bright red color. Observations of the surrounding marine waters were conducted every 30 minutes throughout the day; no dye was detected in the waters surrounding the beach park. On March 11, 2020, dye was still observed to be present in the septic tank, although it was significantly degraded as seen in the last photograph in the bottom row of the table. Observations continued until 12 noon. Daily MBP users (school staff and maintenance staff) were informed of the testing performed over the two days and were asked to note any dye observed after water quality monitoring personnel had left the site. No dye was reported to have been observed by school staff or maintenance staff since leaving the site. Feasibility Study Page 26 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; DISCUSSION OF WATER QUALITY INVESTIGATION & IWS ASSESSMENT The water sampling data obtained in this study show consistent data collection and reproducible results. The relative enterococcus concentrations measured at each sampling area were consistent within the site. Any fluctuations can be explained through the tidal differences and dilution of ground water by ocean water. The results and findings presented have limitations due to the short duration of the study. A longer monitoring period may show seasonal effects or other periodic effects that were not captured in the current study. In general, the waters surrounding Miloli'i Beach Park are being negatively impacted by enterococcus. The greatest concentrations of enterococcus measured were from Areas B, B- Freshwater, and C. These areas are close in proximity and may be from similar groundwater sources such as upland residences or facilities. Area A measured moderate enterococcus concentrations, and only exceeded the recommended threshold on one sampling event. The lowest concentration of enterococcus measured in the marine waters were at Area D (including E) which had virtually no bacteria present. Due to the low elevation of the beach park's leach field, it was hypothesized the waters nearest to the leach field and private residence (Area D) would be highest in enterococcus. This area had the lowest enterococcus measured in the marine waters. The results may be explained by decreased usage of the comfort station during the week and therefore little to no discharge to the leach field. The dye test was also unsuccessful in tracing the path of treated effluent from the septic system. A worthwhile follow up investigation would be to take grab samples at Area D during and immediately after a large parry held at the beach park. Performing a dye test during a period of high flow may also be more successful in determining the ultimate output of the effluent after it passes through the leach field. The IWS site investigation and assessment indicate that the existing IWS appears to be adequate during low to normal usage periods. There were no signs indicating the IWS leach field was clogged and discharging under treated effluent and negatively affecting the surrounding waters. It would also be worthwhile for a follow up investigation to assess the IWS immediately after a large party held at the beach park. Observations of the septic tank may indicate the existing IWS is overtaxed and under sized during high usage periods based on the observed effluent and liquid levels on the risers. However, the over taxing of the IWS was not confirmed during the short duration of the investigation and should be verified in the future. It would also be beneficial for the quarterly pumping of the septic tanks to include opening the distribution box and inspection ports of the leach field to check the liquid levels. Due to the short duration of the sampling period of the investigation and IWS assessment conducted, it appears that the existing IWS is not discharging undertreated effluent and negatively affecting the surrounding waters. As stated, further investigate, especially during high usage period, would be beneficial to provide a more accurate evaluation of the IWS. Although the Feasibility Study Page 27 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; findings in the Water Quality Assessment suggest the existing IWS is adequate, modifications to the existing wastewater treatment system could better ensure that untreated effluent is not discharged to the surrounding waters during periods of high usage or other effects that were not identified in this limited investigation. WASTEWATER SYSTEM OPTIONS This feasibility study considers the following sewage system options: 1) Holding Systems a. Holding Tank b. Evaporative Toilet System c. Prefabricated Waterless Restroom 2) IWS Treated Collection System a. Anua BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofilter b. BioBarrier HSMBR 1.5 c. Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System (M1200) Holding systems presented either eliminate effluent discharge or significantly reduce discharge to the surrounding environment through the absorption field. The IWS systems presented will provide higher -quality effluent as they provide more treatment than the existing system which would decrease potential high bacteria levels in the surrounding waters. Analyses include initial material costs, construction and operation/maintenance costs of the systems (where available), potential environmental impacts, and design challenges. OPTION 1— HOLDING SYSTEM Holding system options temporarily holds waste in tanks and vaults and requires pumping services. Frequency of required pumping services varies between the three options. This section examines the following options: IA. Holding Tank 113. Evaporative Toilet System 1C. Prefabricated Waterless Restroom The holding tank option would replace the existing septic tank and absorption bed and contain all black and gray water generated by the comfort station. The evaporative toilet system and prefabricated waterless restroom would replace the existing comfort station with the possibility of connecting sinks to the existing septic tank and absorption bed to treat gray water as these options only handle black water generated by toilet usage. Feasibility Study Page 28 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. OPTION IA: HOLDING TANK A holding tank is a sealed, buried tank used to collect waste from a facility or dwelling and temporarily stores it for subsequent removal and transport to an approved treatment or disposal site. The tank needs to be designed, constructed, and installed to maintain water -tightness, must not contaminate surface or groundwater, and its location must minimize public exposure to untreated waste. The following analysis assumes a weekly pumping service frequency and an average daily sewage flow of 1,000 gallons per day. The following holding tank calculation is based on the "Recommended Standards and Guidance for Performance, Application, Design, and Operation & Maintenance Holding Tank Sewage System" dated July 2012 and prepared by the Washington State Department of Health Division of Environmental Health. NOV = (DSF)(PSF) NOV— normal operating volume (the liquid storage below the time -to -pump alarm level) DSF— daily sewage flow PSF — pumping service frequency (number of days between pumping, not to exceed 7 even if service is on -call) NOV = (1000 gal/day)(7 days) = 7000 gal RSV = (DSF)(3) RSV— reserve storage volume (the liquid storage above the "time -to -pump" alarm level, and below invert of inlet pipe) RSV = (1000 gal)(3) = 3000 gal TLVC = NOV + RSV TLVC —total liquid volume capacity TLVC = 7000 gal + 3000 gal = 10,000 gal holding tank Therefore, the recommended minimum holding tank size is 10,000 gallons. Feasibility Study Page 29 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Access Riser with secured gas tight lid Inlet frorn 4 structure 1D'Inlet R'p' Reserve Storage Volume T. Normal Operating Volume II Warning Light and Audible Alarrn Purnping Access (Port with sloped) concrete pact Figure 10. Typical Holding Tank Sewage System (Washington State Department of Health) Both concrete and fiberglass holding tanks were considered. A 10,000-gallon concrete holding tank is the largest size offered on the Jensen Precast website. However, this type of tank is not suitable for sitting within the high-water table. An alternate option would be two 5,000-gallon concrete tanks. The dimensions of the tank are 8'-6"W x 17'-6"L x 8'-2" H. The minimum excavation width is 9'-6", and minimum excavation length is 18'-6". A 5,000-gallon Jensen Precast tank is $35,000 for a total of $70,000 for two tanks plus shipping (approximately $4,400.00). See Attachment 2 for price quote and catalog cuts. Xerxes, a manufacturer of fiberglass holding tanks that works with International Wastewater as its distributer in Hawaii, quoted $54,707.77 for a 10,000-gallon tank and $38,102.35 for a 5,000- gallon tank. These prices include the fiberglass tank, concrete deadmen to anchor the tank down, an alarm system to indicate when the tank is reaching capacity, and shipping and handling. Fiberglass tanks are corrosion -resistant, rustproof, and watertight. Xerxes claims that their tanks are designed to accommodate heavy traffic loads and high water -table conditions. Concrete tanks are susceptible to rust if the steel reinforcement is exposed through cracks in the concrete. Xerxes tanks are cylindrical in shape and domed at both ends. This minimizes pockets in which scum or sludge can accumulate. The 10,000-gallon Xerxes holding tank is 8 ft in diameter, with a tank length of 3l'-6.5" and weighs 3,000 pounds. The 5,000-gallon Xerxes holding tank is 8 ft in diameter, with a tank length of 17'-8.5" and weighs 1,700 pounds. See Attachment 2 for Xerxes fiberglass tank information. Due to the size of the tanks and the space constraints of the site, the existing absorption bed would have to be removed to install either the 10,000-gallon tank or the two 5,000-gallon tanks. Since Feasibility Study Page 30 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; the holding tanks would not be discharging any effluent, the usage of the absorption bed would no longer be necessary. Because the holding tanks do not provide any treatment for the wastewater, it could potentially be a source of nuisance odors. Note that venting of the exhaust should be above the roof line of the building. The high groundwater table may also be an issue, and the tank would need to be anchored. A local pumping company provided a rough quote for pumping costs, assuming we would pump the holding tanks weekly, and have an average of 7,000 gallons. The estimated weekly pumping cost for two 3,500-gallon trucks (including travel time) is $2,500. Conclusion Usage of holding tanks would eliminate the possibility of undertreated effluent leeching into the ground and contaminating the surrounding waters due to the containment and storage of the effluent which would be pumped out and properly disposed of. However, the cost of the holding tanks to accommodate the 1,000 gpd rate is a relatively high upfront cost. The cost of pumping, hauling, and disposing of the waste at an approved facility is also very costly on a long-term basis. Given the weekly costs calculated above, one year of pumping could cost about $130,000. Due to the high cost of maintaining the system, the large excavation required and the large footprint of the tanks, this system is possible but not recommended for Miloli'i Beach Park. Feasibility Study Page 31 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. OPTION 1B: EVAPORATIVE TOILET SYSTEM Information for the evaporative toilet system was provided by "Enviro Loo" (manufacturer). The company is stationed in South Africa and has provided sanitation facilities to millions of people worldwide. Notably in the United States, the "Enviro Loo" has been installed in state parks in California, Colorado, Ohio, Oregon, and Texas. The "Enviro Loo" is a waterless toilet system that utilizes sun and wind to transform waste into a neutral material for disposal. The manufacturer claims that the system is odorless with zero discharge, does not use chemicals or electricity, and has a life span in excess of 50 years. They also claim that air flow and heat from the sun dehydrates the solid waste to roughly 5% of its original volume, while the liquid waste evaporates. Negative pressure prevents odors from escaping through air pipes and the toilet bowl. Waste enters the underground container via toilet bowl, where solid wastes remain on a sloped drying plate with liquid draining to the bottom. Waste is exposed to a continuous flow of air and an organic starter pack. Air flow and heat from the sun dehydrates the solid waste. Fecal pathogens are destroyed due to the prolonged residence time in the unit. Waste is then transferred to a drying bag under the vent pipe for 6 months, which kills ascaris worm cysts (helminths). Per Enviro Loo, the average person generates approximately 1.0 / liters of urine and 0.14 kg of solid waste a day. See Attachment 3 for additional information on the Enviro Loo. Figure 11. Enviro Loo Single Unit The manufacturer has informed our office that several units were delivered to Lahaina on Maui for off -grid cabins with no access to infrastructure and that they have been contacted by several National Parks in Hawaii. Brigham Young University also recently ordered a C-60 Commercial Enviro Loo in December 2019 as well as a couple of private residences/cabins. Different models can accommodate a maximum of 10 to Figure 12. Enviro Loo Portable Unit 40 users per day. For our condition, the manufacturer recommended their C-60 model, which requires excavating a pit that is 8.5' L x 4' W x 24-30" H for underground installation. However, the unit can also function above ground if the toilet is installed with stairs. The manufacturer also recommended the addition of a urinal if the unit were to be utilized as Unisex units. The cost of the recommended unit is $4,250 plus the cost of shipping. The optional urinal would add $125 to the cost of the unit. Majority of the customers install the systems themselves. Installation includes burying the unit, anchoring it, and backfilling. The existing comfort station would have to be demolished and reconstructed around the evaporative toilets since the unit must Feasibility Study Page 32 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; be buried. The company can also send someone from their staff to train users. Cost for training merely includes cost of transportation. Training would take one day, and maintenance training could be handled over the phone. Conclusion While evaporative toilets do provide a cost-effective solution for toilet waste, it does not provide treatment for gray water from sink waste. Per the manufacturer, a waterless hand -cleaner could be provided in place of sinks. This method has been allowed in the State of Texas. However, this would require additional maintenance and costs to adequately provide and refill the waterless hand -cleaner with possible installations of anti -theft mechanisms. With reconstruction of the comfort station to install the evaporative toilets, it is possible to connect sinks to the existing septic system to treat gray water. Maintenance can be performed by County Maintenance employees after a one -day training session. However, maintaining the system may require contact with fecal waste. Raking of the dried waste and periodically placing it into a drying bag to hang from the system is required. The manufacturer requires protective clothing when removing waste from the unit (mask, rubber gloves), and advises that the maintenance staff should receive preventative vaccinations against Hepatitis A and B. The system also relies on different environmental factors to perform at its optimum level including temperature, air pressure, wind velocity, and humidity. These factors are beyond the owner's control. The manufacturer states that in locations where wind speeds are low and humidity is high, a solar -powered fan can be installed at an additional cost. It is important to note that daily cleaning of the toilet bowl with a specialized organic granular Enviro Loo toilet cleaner is recommended. Household and industrial cleaners cannot be used. Therefore, the costs of purchasing and shipping the specialized toilet cleaner would also be factored into maintenance costs. Usage of evaporative toilets would eliminate the possibility of undertreated effluent leeching into the ground and contaminating the surrounding waters due to the containment of the effluent and the disposal of the decomposed solid waste. Although the cost of the toilet system itself is relatively inexpensive, initial construction to install (demolishing and reconstructing the comfort station) would be relatively high and long-term maintenance required adds to labor and material costs. The County would be responsible for daily cleaning of the units with specialized cleaner, possibly waterless hand -cleaner refilling, and having maintenance crews encounter fecal waste. Due to these factors, this system is possible but not preferred for Miloli'i Beach Park. Feasibility Study Page 33 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON> 4 VV., to the caTuire- A.i d ca-.1mic imilet bow. Ijq'LId wIci-dlts to d,e gam the coritd f k T11YE so d `ro zte I'tiEiTYd1ns An t'e dying e, + T r � dsty . # a�rtt � s I dad 4 Q n d en o"gdnic st .i is �' t^I gfe -n un t ❑�dwn i aa�rTt�i,)er -%I t-e ino 'vent FlDs d-d 71 r=It X% . 3 As re dll 'T v.7 es thl :�..qh te rI it II rt sLlud Waste a t ,e teT ' qL'- occrof 1 71e co,,-d ,,I eve]'"d#es. TT III 4 Su L -K"ad: L.w.,e wth'dirtTThi��'Yt 4errY��rF. n the mi-ruine; 7-ie late -se hectr Dvo ILA,-&n �i-�c n NTc' evil e `I i 5 At rye eno of t-js Dixxess c rr d ^�to 'n in rls-,I,E d-o squ:)iliszd nMdtEYidl, ,At th-s pant ies I-e&aed to vco ghl, P4 of its aiig ndl volume', 6 T-ie rl 'VI xeFs 1,12 x�ivegts the escge of dlYv .1't^.'auq^,re taikst Dowd a• th,--am , the Av Aet p'Des,, T--e �daji- E venbe� out vid till wi-d CIli-Ir E9 t'd=W. i CO Figure 13. Enviro Loo Treatment Process Feasibility Study Page 34 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. OPTION IC: PREFABRICATED WATERLESS RESTROOM Information for the prefabricated waterless restroom was provided by Biological Mediation Systems, LLC (manufacturer). The company is based in Colorado and claims to be the only full line manufacturer of custom restroom facilities and buildings in the industry. They offer the WRS (Waste Reduction System) Vault Evaporator waterless wastewater system. Their systems are currently in use at ski resorts, trails, camps, highway rest stops, parks, and guest lodges. The WRS system is capable of high usage and the system reduces waste by evaporating liquid and dehydrating waste and has little to no maintenance. Occasional pumping is required, which is determined by the manufacturer's computer program. s Figure 14. WRS Vault Evaporator The system eliminates flush toilets and claim to be odor free. It is safe for the environment, has zero discharge, and does not use chemicals. See Attachment 4 for more information on the WRS building. Figure 15. Prefabricated Restroom in Frisco, Colorado Since the system is a fully operational restroom, they need to be outfitted with standard AC or solar DC power for restroom lights and exhaust/ventilation fans. Per the manufacturer, no systems are currently installed in Hawaii. A standard one toilet WRS building costs about $60,000 plus shipping, installation, and maintenance costs. A standard two toilet model costs about $100,000 plus shipping, installation, and maintenance. The WRS system utilizes an underground vault, which would need to be constructed by a local pre- cast company. With concerns of a shallow groundwater table, this vault would need to be weighed down and waterproofed. Feasibility Study Page 35 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. Conclusion Like the evaporative toilet, the WRS system would eliminate the possibility of undertreated effluent leeching into the ground and contaminating the surrounding waters due to the containment of the effluent and the disposal of the decomposed solid waste. The system would also replace the existing comfort station facilities which would have to be removed to provide enough space for installation. Initial installation costs may be high since the existing structure would have to be demolished. The manufacture also stated that special installation is available to hook-up water for sinks. Like the evaporative toilets, it may be possible to connect the sinks to the existing septic system to treat gray water. Since no systems have been shipped to Hawaii, there may be concerns over high shipping costs and costs to transport the prefabricated building to Miloli'i from the docks. The building would essentially be shipped in its entirety. Also, like the evaporative toilet, the WRS performance rate is based on temperature, humidity, and wind, factors which are beyond the owner's control. Due to these factors, this system is possible but not recommended for Miloli'i Beach Park. Feasibility Study Page 36 of 124 Miloli'i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; OPTION 2 — IWS TREATED COLLECTION SYSTEM IWS are composed of a treatment system (i.e. septic tank, aerobic treatment unit (ATU), etc.) and disposal system (i.e. absorption field, mounded system, seepage pit, etc.). The type of treatment and disposal system is predicated on the site evaluation which determines soil percolation rates, depth to groundwater, area of land available for disposal, and other natural constraints. The existing IWS system includes a septic tank and absorption bed. The HAR 11-62 requires percolation rates for disposal systems to be between 1 and 60 minutes per inch. Because the existing system was approved by DOH, it is assumed that the percolation rate for the absorption bed falls in the HAR 11-62 required rates. It is a possible option to upgrade the treatment unit and maintain the existing absorption field as the disposal system to minimize costs. The following studied IWS systems will produce treated effluent to be discharged to the existing absorption bed. HAR 11-62 states that the minimum horizontal distance from soil absorption systems and treatment units to streams is 50-feet, to property lines is 5-feet, and to building structures is 5-feet. These systems produce a high -quality effluent output due to additional treatment that the existing IWS does not provide. This would decrease the potential negative impacts to surrounding waters due to less -treated effluent. For a design flow of 1,000 gallons per day, septic tanks must have a minimum capacity of 1,250 gallons (per HAR 11-62), and ATU's must have a minimum capacity of 1,000 gallons with preloader septic tank, or 1,250 gallons with preloader chamber integrated into the ATU. This section examines the following options: 2A. Anua BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofilter 2B. BioBarrier High Strength Membrane BioReactor (HSMBR 1.5) 2C. Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System (M1200) Feasibility Study Page 37 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; OPTION 2A: ANuA BIOCOIlt COCONUT FIBER BIOFILTER Anua International is an American manufacturer of N5500 products that treat/filter water and air. Anua recently acquired Quantics and expanded their water treatment system options. One of the systems that Anua now offers through the acquisition is a wastewater treatment system called the "BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofilter," that is used N575B in conjunction with a septic tank and dosing tank. The septic tank effluent flows through an effluent filter into the dosing tank where an effluent pump doses the wastewater to the BioCoir treatment modules. A timed dosed control panel controls the dosing which occurs in short frequent doses over a period of 24 hours. Spray eAbN51000 nozzles are used to provide uniform distribution of the effluent over the entire surface area of the coconut fiber (coir) media. As the effluent moves via gravity through the media, it encounters microorganisms that serve to treat the effluent to NSF International Standard 40 Class 1 requirements. A Quantics ATS-GRD-100/80/20 Figure 16. Different Models of the recirculation device is then used to split the flow and BioCoir Treatment Pods discharges 80% back into the treatment system and 20% to the existing absorption. Typical treatment performance includes levels of BODS between <10 to <30 mg/l, TSS between <10 to <30 mg/l, and total nitrogen <20 ml/l. The coir media used in the system are the fibers that constitute the husk of the coconut and is a low-cost, renewable resource. The high lignin content of the fibers results in a durable material and allows free airflow and water movement through the media. No vehicle traffic should be allowed over or near the system as the pods are not traffic rated. The system should be able to function with intermittent use as the daily usage of the comfort station varies throughout the week. Under low flow conditions, 100% of the treated effluent discharges back into the treatment system rather than being discharged to the media chambers. 1.25" Pressure Inlet Llne \ Lid Control Panel Junction Box Rlser`\ BD% Flow For Neturn a' Line �t \ j Flow In � _ 4.. Line Grommet 20% Flow to DreinlrelQor 1 Pump Chamber Float Tree FiltereC Pump Vault 1 �.... Dosing lump 2x Design Flaw Ix Design Flaw - Figure 17. BioCoir Treatment System Feasibility Study Page 38 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON> 4 Per the manufacturer's recommendation, the proposed system consists of utilizing the existing 1,250-gallon septic tank, an additional 1,500-gallon tank that will also serve as the dosing tank, and three BioCoir pods. Effluent will initially enter the existing septic tank, then enter the dosing tank, and then the BioCoir pods where 80% of the effluent will recirculate back into the dosing tank for further treatment and 20% will continue to the existing absorption field. It was also recommended to have a highwater gravity bypass line from the pretreatment tanks to the absorption bed in the event of a short-lived hydraulic overload of the system. Lastly an alkalinity basin on the recirculation line was recommended since it is anticipated that the waste stream from the bathrooms to be high in ammonia. The BioCoir pod footprint dimensions are 5-feet by 11-feet and the 1,500-gallon tank is about 5- feet by 15-feet. Installation can usually be completed in a day. Electrical power is required for the two pumps and control panel. The manufacturer is able to work the system to include solar panels that will adequately power the system and noted that with that type of arrangement, it is possible to have they system set to go offline for a couple days (Mon -Wed or Mon-Tues) to do nothing but charge. This also might allow for less panels. Also, with it offline, either on a set schedule or if you get three weeks of clouds, the gravity bypass pipe will allow the system to continue to run the old way as a backup or during the low flow periods. DOH also requires backup generators for IWS systems in the event of power loss to the system. Due to the space constraints of the site, the existing septic tank will have to be relocated to provide space for the additional tank. Anua provided quotes for the BioCoir system. Costs are shown below. BioCoir System: IM 1530 Dosing Tank: 1,500 gallons Timed Dose BioCoir Pump: 1 BioCoir pods: 3 26" Diameter Puralinity Basin: 1 Estimated equipment cost + oversight: $21,649.84 Estimated shipping cost: $13,380.00 ESTIMATED COST: $35,029.84 Feasibility Study Page 39 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; Anua also manufactures a similar system called the Puraflo Peat Biofilter that uses a peat fiber media instead of the coconut coir fibers in the BioCoir system. The Puraflo system components and function work like the BioCoir, however due to the area constraints and shipping costs, it was deemed an impractical and unfeasible option. Per the manufacturer, the shipping costs would be significantly higher than the equipment itself. The BioCoir system requires regular lifetime semi-annual inspections and maintenance. The manufacturer recommends pumping the septic and dosing tanks every 3 to 5 years. See Attachment 5 for additional information. Conclusion: The BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofilter system would provide additional tank storage to the existing septic tank and add additional treatment with the coconut fiber pods before effluent is discharged to the absorption bed. This would not eliminate effluent discharge but will increase the quality of the discharge to mitigate negative effects to the surrounding waters. The BioCoir system seems like a feasible solution, given its low maintenance and ability to be installed at grade to accommodate the high ground water table. The coconut media is biodegradable and typically needs to be replaced every 7 to 10 years. Typical septic tank and pump tank maintenance also applies which has been ongoing for the existing system. One major benefit of the BioCoir system is the capability to be designed to run off solar panels and scheduled to provide time to charge the system. Feasibility Study Page 40 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; OPTION 2B: BIOBARRIER HIGH STRENGTH MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR (HSMBR 1.5) BioBarrier High Strength Membrane BioReactors (HSMBRs) are manufactured by BioMicrobics and provide primary settling, fecal coliform, BOD, TSS and nitrogen reduction (if needed) using aeration and anoxic zones, and membrane filtration. BioMicrobics claims that the system treats wastewater to 99.9% clean of contaminants and is NSF/ANSI Standard 40 (Class I), 245 (nitrogen reduction), and 350 certified. The system is designed to treat both black water and gray water. Depending on the level of treatment desired, there may be two or three compartment tanks within the system (if nitrogen reduction is desired, there will be three tanks). Effluent produced from the system when it is functioning properly should be clear and odorless, and is suitable for water reuse applications, including toilet flushing and outdoor landscape irrigation (as long as vegetation is not meant for human consumption). This would require additional reuse permitting. The operation sequence requires no backwash functionality and is completely automated. Due to the shallow groundwater table, this unit can still function partially exposed above ground. The existing septic tank will be used as a settling tank with the two 2,000-gallon tanks with the BioBarrier components following to provide the aeration treatment. The new 2,000 tanks will then be connected to the existing absorption bed. The following treatment sequence was provided by BioBarrier: 1) In the primary settling zone, a SaniTEE device is used to prevent large solids from entering the treatment zone. [This settling zone acts as the septic tank.] 2) A remote, above -ground blower introduces air (oxygen) into the treatment module to facilitate a robust circulation and aeration of wastewater. 3) Once inside the treatment tank, suspended treatment occurs. Optional LIXOR System can be used for extra aeration for higher than normal BOD concentrations. [LIXOR — submerged aeration system] 4) Immersed in the treatment tank, the BioBarrier module(s) and air grid(s) create an upward flow between membrane plates providing vigorous scouring action. 5) Water passes through the membranes for microfiltration and ultrafiltration processes. The flat -sheet membrane utilizes micro -sized pores for physical separation of the wastewater solids. 6) Clear, odorless, treated water exits the system. The system requires electrical power for the blower, control panel, and water level float devices. Each HSMBR 1.5 can run on single phase 220V power with full load amps for the blower and pumps totaling about 10 Amps. The amperage is broken down by 0.5 amps for each filtrate pump (2 pumps total) and 9 amps for the 1.5 HP blower. The blower has a starting current of 29.2 amps. The two systems will require a total full load of 40 Amps. DOH also requires a backup generator in the event of power loss. The system's capability of running off solar energy will need to be further examined. Assuming adequate electrical power can be provided via solar panels, the required number of panels will need to be determined by an electrical engineer. DOH also requires IWS systems to have a backup generator in the event of power loss. Feasibility Study Page 41 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON> 4 =.,,F7ho Settlinq Zone ='u•�e Volunic, '.5-1 Treatment Zone times daV V f ov, f;l.: iLJ --t- Operating Water Level [168] o 66 m SECTION-B Mc.xA ­ I,, Vwit.w Level 80 fiu'i Pt X Figure 19. BioBarrier HSMBR 1.5 The BioBarrier HSMBR will function normally even if no wastewater flows during short periods of vacancy. It should be noted that the membranes should always stay wet for optimal performance. Should power loss occur, the system will not stop pumping and will shut down. Effluent will not flow out of the tank ensuring that undertreated effluent does not leave the system and infiltrate in the absorption field. The alarm system will activate, and an operator will be called. The BioBarrier system provides a very high effluent quality and the sludge wasting schedule would most likely be from no more than once a year to every two years for this application. The system has a lifespan of approximately 15-20 years. Similar systems have been installed in Kahauiki Village on Oahu and in an Oahu and Kona Costco. These are pilot projects and are running in custom tank configurations. Feasibility Study Page 42 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; The local distributor of the BioBarrier, Fluid Technologies, has provided a quote of $127,800.00 for two BioBarrier HSMBR 1.5 systems and tanks, including the construction/installation, UV disinfection systems for added treatment, Mission RTU alarm and monitoring system installation and one year service package (includes backup battery in the event of power loss), sludge pump out and inspections twice a year, and shipping. It should be noted that the UV system will require additional engineering to design the system. The two tanks to be provided are 2,000 gallons and are 8'-4" L x 5'-10"W. See Attachment 6 for more information on the BioBarrier HSMBR and for the cost estimate. A. Influent B. SaniTEE,. C. Blowerr R Housing D. Control) Panel E. Vent F. Optional battel wall G. BioBarrier Reactor H. Optional Mixing blower Figure 20. BioBarrier System Components Conclusion: C Similar to the BioCoir system, the BioBarrier system would provide additional tank storage to the existing system while providing additional treatment through aerobic and UV treatment. This would not eliminate effluent discharge but will increase the quality of the discharge to mitigate negative effects to the surrounding waters. The BioBarrier High Strength Membrane Bioreactor is a feasible solution to provide adequate wastewater treatment due to its high quality of treatment, and automation provided that the necessary power supply can be provided to run the system. To provide adequate power, either electrical infrastructure improvements will need to be done to the site or further investigation will need to be done to determine if solar panels can provide enough power for the system. Feasibility Study Page 43 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON*> 4; OPTION 2C: NAYADIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM (M1200) Nayadic Wastewater Treatment Systems are manufactured by Consolidated Treatment Systems and provide primary settling, fecal coliform, BOD, and TSS using an "aerobic" treatment process. When the system is properly functioning, the aerobic treatment causes no offensive odors. The Nayadic system has been certified under ANSI/NSF Standard 40 protocol as a class 2 system and removes more than 95% of wastewater contaminants. The system was designed with the installer in mind and is lightweight, compact, and easy to transport and install. The fiberglass tank is conical shaped which requires less excavation than traditional systems. Each system includes the fiberglass tank, audible/visual alarm, external compressor and hardware, and atwo- year manufacturer's warranty. The fiberglass tank will Figure 21. Nayadic Unit be installed between the existing septic tank and the absorption bed to provide aerobic treatment before the effluent is disposed of to the bed. The system uses microbes to naturally perform the wastewater treatment. These bacteria take about six to eight weeks to acclimate themselves to the wastewater and colonize in sufficient concentration that measurable treatment occurs. "Seeding" can be used to eliminate this start-up performance lag. Seeding is accomplished by obtaining about 50 gallons of mixed liquor from another Nayadic unit. The already acclimated, concentrated colony should experience no delay in acclimating to the new unit so that a performance lag may be circumvented. The bacteria are naturally occurring and provides the initial stages of wastewater treatment to break down waste. The aerobic and additional UV treatment then kill off the bacteria prior to being discharged to the absorption field. The system requires electrical power for the air compressor for recirculation and alarm system. The unit requires 1 phase, 120v, 60Hz, and must be continuous. Per the manufacturer, there have been numerous inquiries about connecting to an off -grid power system, but they have no record of any that have been implemented. A battery system will need to be included to provide the continuous power in the event that the power source is unavailable. The Nayadic system has low maintenance and only requires routine inspections and period pumping of excess solids. Service to the system can be provided by a locally trained representative. The alarm system will also sound pending any problems. Nayadic systems have been installed throughout Hawaii Island in both residential and commercial applications. Feasibility Study Page 44 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. AIR LINE RECIRCULATION PIPE SUPPORT RECIRCULATION PIPE OVERFLOW WEIR SCUM BAFFLE OUTER TANK Figure 22. Nayadic M-1200A FFLE 0 WEIR The M-1200A model has a 1,200-gallon holding capacity and a 1,000-gallon treated capacity. The entire unit is about 96-inchs in diameter and 103-inches in height and weighs about 1,150 lbs. The unit will be connected to the existing septic tank which will be used as a pretreatment tank and improve performance of the unit. The unit will also be connected to the existing absorption field to provide disposal for the treated effluent. Because the unit will most likely be exposed to the high-water table, a ballast ring anchor should also be installed to hold the unit in place. See attachment X. The local distributor for Nayadic, Aina Engineering, has provided a quote of $4,700.00 for the Nayadic Model M-1200A system. Shipping cost for the unit and its components was quoted to be $9,270 for spot delivery to the project site. It should be noted that the shipping costs are only valid for 30 days and the quote was provided on May 21, 2020. See Attachment 7 for more information on the Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System and for the cost estimate. UV disinfection is also available with the Nayadic system. Consolidated Treatment Systems recently launched their own UV disinfection units, Flow2 that can be added to the Nayadic unit. Their UV disinfection systems reduce bacteria levels more than 99%. The local distributor has provided a quote of $980.00 for the Standard Model which would further treat the effluent out of the Nayadic unit. Feasibility Study Page 45 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. ON> 4 LID EXTENSION - OPTIONAL COVER o INNER TANK SUPPORTS { f I RECIRCULATION PIPE (DRAFT TUBE) x� RECIRCULATION SUPPORTS DIFFUSER AIRLINE SCUM BAFFLE EFFLUENT WEIR INNER TANK CUTER TAN K Figure 23. Typical Nayadic Tank Components Conclusion: Like the BioBarrier system, the Nayadic system would provide additional tank storage to the existing system while providing additional treatment through aerobic and UV treatment. This would not eliminate effluent discharge but will increase the quality of the discharge to mitigate negative effects to the surrounding waters. The Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System is a feasible solution to provide adequate wastewater treatment due to its high quality of treatment, and automation provided that the necessary power supply can be provided to run the system. Benefits of the system include possible less excavation due to its unique conic shape and its low maintenance requirements. Feasibility Study Page 46 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. DISCUSSION OF WASTEWATER SYSTEM OPTIONS The different options presented in this report are summarized in Table 20 which includes the initial cost and pros and cons. While the holding tank option would eliminate the potential for under treated effluent from being discharged into the surrounding environment by providing zero effluent discharge, it is unsustainable and cost prohibitive in the long run. Because the tanks would store all effluent from the comfort station, the tanks would need to be pumped on a weekly basis. A local pumping company provided a quote of $2,500 per week to pump the tanks using two 3,500-gallon capacity trucks. The location of MBP also increases pumping costs due to the time it takes to travel from either Hilo or Kona. With pumping every week, the yearly maintenance cost would be approximately $130,000 making the holding tank option infeasible. While the Anua, BioBarrier, and Nayadic systems are more cost effective, it should be noted that the electrical power requirements are a major factor in feasibility since the site is currently powered by an off -grid system. Per the manufacturer, the Anua BioCoir system is capable of being designed to be powered by solar panels while implementing an off/on schedule that will allow for recharging. There is also the bypass line from the dosing tank to the absorption bed if the system is down. However, Anua does not have a significant presence locally which may pose a problem with repairs in the event of a major malfunction. Both the BioBarrier HSMBR and Nayadic Systems have been installed locally with trained professionals available to perform maintenance and repairs. However, the major drawback for both systems is the power supply. Both manufacturers have not seen an installation with an off -grid power supply but had said their systems should be functional if enough power is supplied through solar panels or an alternate source. This would require further assessment to determine feasibility. Alternately, upgrading the site to be connected to a conventional power supply is also possible but costly. The evaporative toilet and prefabricated restroom systems are also both feasible options but require a separate system to handle the gray water from sink facilities. The units would require construction/renovation of the comfort station for installation which comes with additional construction costs. The units itself also do not include sink facilities which would have to be separately provided and connected to its own disposal system (possible to use the existing IWS system for gray water). Feasibility Study Page 47 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Table 20 — Summary of Wastewater Sys ins for WON Beach Park Option Cost Pros Cons $74,400.00 (two 5,000-gallon concrete holding tanks, includes shipping) - High long-term costs due to regular $50,096.13 - Zero discharge into (Weekly) maintenance [Quote from 1 A) Holding Tank (10,000-gallon fiberglass holding tan, includes surrounding BnB pumping: $2,500/week for two deadmen, alarm package, and shipping) environment/waters 3,500-gallon trucks = $130,000/year (52 weeks)] $57,183.13 Nuisance odors (two 5,000-gallon fiberglass holding tanks, includes deadmen, alarm package, and shipping 1) Holding Contact with waste Systems Gray water system for sinks required 1B) Evaporative Toilet $4,250.00 (per C-60 model toilet) Zero discharge into unless they are omitted, and waterless System +$125 for each additional urinal surrounding hand cleaners used. County would be (plus cost of shipping and installation) environment/waters responsible for daily refilling/maintenance and possible anti -theft devices. $60,000.00 per one restroom Gray water system for sinks required 1 C) Prefabricated (plus cost of shipping and installation) Zero discharge into unless they are omitted, and waterless Waterless surrounding hand cleaners used. County would be Restroom $100,000.00 per two restrooms environment/waters responsible for daily (plus cost of shipping and installation) refilling/maintenance and possible anti -theft devices. Possible to be powered by solar Requires electrical power supply 2A) Anna BioCoir $35,029.84 panels and put on an on off Backup generator required Coconut Fiber (includes shipping) schedule to charge per Possible issues with repairs if major Biofilter manufacturer. malfunction occurs since Anna does not have a big localpresence. Requires electrical power supply, 2) IWS -Has been installed locally and manufacturer unsure if possible to Treated 213) BioBarrier " $127,800.00 trained inspectors for the run off of an off -grid system Collection HSMBR (includes shipping and installation) system are available May require major electrical System infrastructure upgrades Backup generator required Requires electrical power supply, 2C) Nayadic -Has been installed locally and manufacturer unsure if possible to Wastewater $15,654.44 trained inspectors for the run off of an off -grid system Treatment (includes shipping) system are available May require major electrical System infrastructure upgrades Backup generator required = --NOT FEASIBLE = -- FEASIBLE WITH ADDITONAL GRAY WATER SYSTEM = -- FEASIBLE WITH ELECTRICAL POWER Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. TREATED EFFLUENT DISPOSAL All systems explored in the IWS Treated Collection System (Option 2) Section of this report produce treated effluent that needs to be disposed of per HAR 11-62. The standards state: "Effluent from a septic tank shall be discharged into a soil absorption system, sand filter, subsurface irrigation system as approved by the director, or other treatment unit approved for use by the director " (HAR 11-62-33.1) "Effluent from an aerobic unit shall be discharged into a soil absorption system, sand filter, subsurface irrigation system as approved by the director, or other treatment unit or disposal system approved for use by the director. " (HAR 11-62-33.1) "In areas below (makai of) the Underground Injection Control Line established pursuant to Chapter H-23, where the vertical separation distance from the discharge to the seasonal high groundwater table is less than three feet, a new household aerobic unit may discharge its effluent into an elevated mound to achieve the vertical separation of drip irrigation system or, with a variance approved by the director and if the effluent is disinfected, to a seepage pit. Where water bearing formations are in danger of contamination, the director may require greater vertical separation. " (HAR 11-62-33.1) The existing absorption bed can be connected to the new treatment system and serve as the effluent disposal system to satisfy the requirements by HAR 11-62. It should also be noted that the HAR 11-62-33.1 requires a contract for inspections of the IWS systems every six months, including regular maintenance. "Owners of proposed and existing household aerobic units shall have an active service contract for the proper maintenance of the aerobic unit and its disposal system with a certified operator or factory certified representative, and a copy of an active service contract shall be submitted annually to the department. The contract shall also include pumping service to maintain the household aerobic unit. For proposed household aerobic units, a copy of an executed service contract shall be submitted prior to the final approval of the individual wastewater system. " Feasibility Study Page 49 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATIONS Based off the findings from the water quality investigation and existing IWS condition assessment the following recommended options are: Option 1 Keep the existing IWS. Based on the Water Quality Investigation it was found that while waters surrounding MBP are being negatively impacted by enterococcus, waters closest to the leach field had the lowest enterococcus measured. There were also no signs of effluent leaching from the dye test performed. Based on these findings, it appears that the existing IWS is sufficient for handling normal day-to-day flows. It is recommended that further investigation (e.g. during high usage periods) and increasing the frequency of pumping (e.g. from once every three months to once a month) be considered. Option 2 Upsize the septic tank and leach field to handle the estimated weekend usage of about 100+ people. Provide a 3,125-gallon septic tank and 45 ft by 24.5 ft absorption bed. The estimated high usage population shall be verified for better sizing accuracy. Siting of the upsized septic tank and leach field will also need be considered based on the site constraints. Option 3 If, by public demand, a decrease in bacterial output needs to be achieved, then install either a Holding System or IWS Treated Collection System option as discussed in the Wastewater System Options section of this report and summarized in Table 20. The County will select one of the options in conjunction with community input and budgetary consideration. At this time, Option 1 is recommended based on the results of the Water Quality Investigation, dye test and the IWS capacity for normal day-to-day flows. Further investigation during high usage periods and increasing the frequency of pumping is also highly recommended. This will help determine if the existing IWS is functioning properly during high usage periods and determine an approximate high usage population. Feasibility Study Page 50 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development. Inc. REFERENCES • Hawaii Administrative Rules Title 11, Department of Health Chapter 62 Wastewater Systems, dated March 21, 2016 ATTACHMENTS Attachment 1— As -Built Plans Attachment 2 — Holding Tank Attachment 3 — Evaporative Toilet System Attachment 4 — Prefabricated Waterless Restroom Attachment 5 — Anua BioCoir Coconut Fiber Biofilter Attachment 6 — BioBarrier High Strength Membrane BioReactor (HSMBR) Attachment 7 — Nayadic Wastewater Treatment System Feasibility Study Page 51 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT AS -BUILT PLANS Feasibility Study Page 52 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park LEGEND NOTES TREE PROTECTION NOTE' h-hy ald VITT` OVERALL WE PLAN MILOUI BEACH PARK IWS IMPROVEMENTS 01 e , , " I - -1 C-23 10 8 6 4 2 0 HAWS PROFILE nai=r rat r = rn �N o P EAI P r warEe ois. as � sYSi �A_t'l cws_ r M NCTE V if r �ma� f -i aau ar t \ G 93 3823�.--� 89'12 ` 1 e t LP J.�F FSiA SMM mE'SA uuWC E IAAM6 k (GVfAs DETAIL SITE PLAN i 111 ElIS- 77 --------------- J- \� , \ �_& � ®« _ � � ------------------ ORFTION BED LAY-O-Lrr I @"UTION BOX DETAIL _, L-, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 2 HOLDING TANK Feasibility Study Page 56 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park HJ4000 & HJ5000 GALLON HOLDING TANKS-HAWAII lmTRAFFIC RATED 'A' INLET PLAN VIEW f A f 12" MIN.' WHEN SUBJECT TO TRAFFIC INVERT 4.. CROSS SECTION OUTLET 24" CAST IRON FRAME & COVER WITH GASKET. (TWO STANDARD) PUG RETE _\ 2432 RISER-3", 6" OR 12" 5' r LIQUID WIDTH OVERALL TANK HEIGHT INLET OUTLET MINIMUM MINIMUM *DEPTH MAX. MODEL CAPACITY 'A' LENGTH ,D, ,E, EXCAVATION EXCAVATION OF LIFT NUMBER GALLONS 'B' C' WIDTH LENGTH BURY WEIGHT HJ4000HT 4000 8'-6" 13'-9" 8'-2" 6'-8" 6'-5" 9'-6" 14'-9" 6' MAX. 33,100 HJ5000HT 5000 8'-6" 17'-6" 8'-2" 6'-8" 6'-5" 9'-6" 18'-6" 6' MAX. 36,700 ■ TANK DESIGNED FOR H-20 TRAFFIC WHEEL LOAD WITH 1' TO 6' MAX. EARTH COVER AND WATER TABLE AT ONE FOOT BELOW GRADE. ■ SUITABLE NATIVE SOIL OR GRANULAR SUB -BASE SHALL BE COMPACTED AND LEVELED TO HANDLE ANTICIPATED LOADS. SEE INSTALLATION PROCEDURES SHEET FOR ADDITIONAL INFO. ■ EXTERIOR AND INTERIOR CONCRETE SURFACES TO BE COATED WITH AN APPROVED BITUMINOUS MATERIAL. THE DESIGN AND DETAIL OF THIS DRAWING ARE THE PROPERTY OF JENSEN PRECAST AND NOT TO BE USED INOWN ■ FOR COMPLETE DESIGN AND PRODUCT INFORMATION DESIGN ANDTINVEN IONERGHTSWTS ARE ITH IRESERVEDWORK. CONTACT JENSEN PRECAST. 02-10-0 H J4000—H J5000— H T— H, dwg 0 2005 Jensen Precast PRECAST® JEHEEff ' EST. 1968 HAWAII DIVISION 91-110 HANUA STREET SUITE #202 KAPOLEI, HI 96707 PH: (808) 528-1175 Fax: (808) 528-1151 QUOTATION Project Name: Milolii Beach Park Project Location: Kawaihae, HI Customer Name: Bow Engineering and Development, Inc. AttnTo Kelsie Sasabe Phone: (808)941-8853 Quote Number: Q-00052030 Quoted Date: 5/07/2020 Quoted By: Andy Nakasone ITEM CITY UOM DESCRIPTION PRICE EACH EXT PRICE 1 2.00 Each HJ5000 Holding Tank $35,000.00 $70,000.00 Kit includes: 1 - HJ4000 Holding Tank 2 - 32" O.D./24" I.D. 12" Grade Rings 2 - 24" Diameter Cast Iron Covers "Sanitary Sewer" 1 -Traffic Rated Plug Ship Code: OTHERS -AS SPECIFIED DELIVERY NET PRICE $4,400.00 Number of Trucks 2.00 Freight Products coated on interior and exterior with Dehydratine 75, Bituminous damp proof coating. This quotation is based on the information provided to us when the request for quotation was received in our office. Jensen Precast reserves the right to change our quotation should additional information be provided subsequent to the quotation date. Prices quoted are subject to change based on engineer approval. Additional grade rings may be purchased separately (sizes 3" 6" & 12") All items quoted exclude: any ladders/manhole rungs, core holes, pipe to manhole connectors, liners, coatings, sloped floors/flow channels, sump covers, epoxy coated rebar, and any items not explicitly called out or mentioned. Contractor responsible for verifying quantities/inverts/grading. Contractor responsible for adjusting frame/cover/grate elevations in field as necessary. Contractor responsible for all incidental material and labor Order is F.O.B Young Brothers dock - Kawaihae, HI. Others responsible for delivery to jobsite and offloading/setting at jobsite. G.E. tax (4.5% retail, 0.5%wholesale) not included. Tax to be added upon placement of order. Price based on acceptance of Jensen Precast design. All estimated lead times begin after receiving submittal approval. Jensen precast standard mix design (>5000PSI at 28 days) to be used in fabrication of all products.. Quote does not include any additives or deviations from our standard mix design. All ITEMS TO BE MANUFACTURED IN A NPCA CERTIFIED PRODUCTION PLANT. GRAND TOTAL: $74,400.00 Printed Date:5/07/2020 1 JEHNEH-[]EST.1968 HAWAII DIVISION 91-110 HANUA STREET SUITE #202 KAPOLEI, HI 96707 PH: (808) 528-1175 Fax: (808) 528-1151 Quote Number: Q-00052030 Quoted Date: 5/07/2020 Includes: 2.00 Special truck(s), Please allow minimum 72 hours from request for delivery to receipt of goods. This is in addition to the time required for manufacturing of the product, which will be determined upon receipt of purchase order. Delivery includes 1.00 hours of offload & set time per truck. If the material is loaded and subsequently cancelled by the customer, a minimum restocking fee of $300.00 will apply to each load. ALL ORDERS ARE SUBJECT TO CREDIT APPROVAL AND ACCEPTANCE BY SELLER. QUOTED PRICES DO NOT INCLUDE SALES TAX ON PRECAST ITEMS. A 3% CREDIT CARD SERVICE FEE MAY BE ADDED FOR ALL CREDIT CARD PAYMENTS. DELIVERY TRIPS, SETTING TIME, OR MATERIALS NOT NOTED ABOVE WILL BE BILLED ACCORDINGLY. OFFER TO SELL SUBJECT TO JENSEN PRECAST'S COMPANY POLICIES, TERMS AND CONDITIONS. PLEASE REFER TO https://www.jensenprecast.com/legal/Terms-And-Conditions-Honolulu.pdf FOR COMPLETE TERMS AND CONDITIONS WHICH ARE HEREBY INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE ALL SPECIALIZED PRODUCT MAY BE SUBJECTTO A DEPOSIT PRIOR TO SUBMITTALS AND/OR PRODUCTION QUOTATION IS VALID FOR 30 DAYS. THANK YOU FOR CHOOSING JENSEN PRECAST! BY CUSTOMER Andy Nakasone BY JENSEN PRECAST CONTACT INFORMATION CUSTOMER PO Email: anakasone@jensenprecast.com Phone: +1 (808) 682-5901 Printed Date:5/07/2020 CORPORATION a subsidiary of ZCL Composites Inc. Fiberglass Underground Wastewater Tanks ^ r 4y,. '« 11 .. s _r w Y' Xerxes Fiberglass Wastewater Tanks Fiberglass Tanks for Long -Term Storage of Wastewater As communities, businesses and industries become increasingly accountable to meet environmental requirements for liquids that require safe, design -proven storage, Xerxes is in the forefront with innovative answers. When considering the options in customized systems to process and store wastewater, facility designers and owners look for a long-term, structurally strong, watertight and cost-effective option. That is exactly what the Xerxes fiberglass tank is. For decades, Xerxes has been well-known as a major tank suppli- er to the petroleum industry, with more than 150,000 tanks installed. Many of the world's largest oil companies rely on Xerxes to supply environmentally safe underground tanks for storage of gasoline at their retail service stations. Throughout the neighbor- hoods and communities of America, Xerxes underground tanks are in place, simultaneously storing products and protecting the environment. Today Xerxes is taking its place in those same neighborhoods and communities as a major supplier of storage tanks for wastewater applications — including septic, recirculation, dosing and hold- ing tanks — as well as other liquids, such as leachate, chemicals, potable water, fire -protection water, irrigation water, gray water, rain water, stormwater and emergency -supply water. Each time a Xerxes fiberglass underground tank is delivered to a customer, the same performance standard has been met — a vessel for safe underground storage of liquid and careful protection of the envi- ronment. Tanks Designed & Manufactured by a Long -Time Industry Leader Xerxes is a leader in the design and manufacture of high -qual- ity, cost-effective products that help protect the fragile rela- tionship between humans and their environment. Each Xerxes wastewater tank represents decades of innovation and proven experience developing and fabricating fiberglass storage tanks for underground storage of liquids. At Xerxes, excellence in service is as highly valued as excellence in product design and manufacturing. Xerxes' four strategically located manufacturing facilities in the United States provide customers with prompt, economical delivery and quality serv- ice. That gives Xerxes tanks one more advantage — they are readily available to customers throughout the country. Watertight Tanks Featuring the Many Benefits of Fiberglass A fiberglass wastewater tank, by virtue of its materials and design, is inherently the superior choice for safe, long-term storage and treatment of wastewater for a wide range of applications. The best storage system for wastewater is structurally strong, corrosion - resistant, watertight, easily installed and cost-effective. All these elements come together in the design and manufacture of a Xerxes fiberglass wastewater tank. Xerxes uses only high -quality resin and glass in the manufacture of its fiberglass tanks. For added structural strength, Xerxes tanks are designed with integral ribs. Because the integral ribs and tank are made of the same materials and are manufactured simultane- ously, the Xerxes tank is a very robust tank. It is designed to accommodate heavy traffic loads and high water -table conditions when properly installed. Fiberglass tanks available from smaller fabricators may also utilize ribs, but they may not be designed for traffic environments and do not have the same robust design fea- tures of a Xerxes tank. While concrete tanks are widely viewed as structurally strong, many are not designed for the heavy loading conditions that vehicle traffic and groundwater can present. Since water by nature can create a corrosive environment, rust can be a major weakness in some underground wastewater storage sys- tems. The materials used to construct Xerxes fiberglass tanks are inherently rustproof and corrosion -resistant. Concrete tanks, whether precast or poured -in -place, are susceptible to rust if the steel reinforcement is exposed through cracks in the concrete. Exposure to hydrogen sulfide gases, present in wastewater tanks, can also cause corrosion damage to a concrete tank and steel rein- forcement, thereby limiting the tank's useful life. Since waste- water tanks can be exposed to highly corrosive conditions, select- ing a Xerxes wastewater tank gives system owners and designers the assurance that rust or corrosion will not cause a leak or struc- tural failure. Aside from being rustproof and corrosion -resistant, a Xerxes tank is also designed to be watertight. Easily equipped for on -site pres- sure testing before or after installation, Xerxes wastewater tanks give owners the confidence that the tank is watertight from the day it is installed. This feature is of growing importance with today's stringent regulations, many requiring watertight systems. For more than 28 years Xerxes has been manufacturing thousands of underground tanks for use in the petroleum industry, where a zero leak rate is the accepted industry standard. These fuel tanks must be leak -free, not only upon installation, but for decades, ver- ified by periodic, precision -testing practices that are routine for gasoline tanks. Leaking concrete tanks are one of the reasons that Xerxes tanks have become such a popular choice for wastewater applications. Concrete, by its nature, is vulnerable to cracking. In most cases, precast concrete tanks rely on sealants or adhesives to seal the seams designed into the tank. When the ground around the tank shifts or settles, or when the tank is improperly installed, these seams are sus- ceptible to leaking, causing either groundwater contamination or groundwater infiltrating into the tank, requiring the system to processes groundwater along with septage. A structurally strong, watertight fiberglass tank eliminates both of these problems. Quality manufacturing is key to producing a strong, watertight tank. When it comes to the environment, Xerxes knows that too much is at stake to manufacture anything less than a superior underground storage tank. Xerxes maintains high standards of quality in the manufacture of each tank. The quality control steps are applied in a tightly controlled manufacturing environment. On the other hand, the same level of quality control may not be maintained in situations where tanks are assembled, in part or in whole, in the field and where weather conditions may not allow careful quality control procedures. Features of Xerxes Wastewater Tanks • Constructed of rustproof, long-lasting fiberglass • Manufactured to meet customers' functional requirements • Designed with integral ribs for added strength • Designed for H-20 load conditions • Easy to ship and install • Can be purchased with accessories that allow for both pre -installation or post -installation pressure testing • Manufactured to applicable requirements of Underwriters Laboratories (UL) 1316 and ANSUAWWA D120 • Able to be reinstalled after recertification by Xerxes • Available in single -wall, double -wall and triple -wall models • Available in sizes from 600 gallons to sizes in excess of 60,000 gallons E The Design of Xerxes Wastewater Tanks Offers Many Advantages Many advantages of a Xerxes wastewater tank come from the geometry of the tank itself. The Xerxes tank has a cylindrical shape and is domed at both ends, which offers major benefits in terms of both operation and maintenance. The shape of a Xerxes tank maximizes the natural flow of liquids through a vessel, allow- ing for the smooth flow of liquids through the tank and maxi- mum use of the tank's interior. A domed, cylindrical tank minimizes pockets or "dead" spots in which scum or sludge can accumulate. The smooth, rounded sur- faces of the tank's interior provide a significant advantage when pumping out scum and sludge. Tanks designed with squared cor- ners and sharp angles can have pockets and "dead" spots, creating two major disadvantages — diminished volume and spaces in which scum and sludge settle. When a Xerxes wastewater tank is delivered to an installation site, all it needs to be ready for operation is connection of the piping and installation of the risers, which allow for easy access to the tank for maintenance and cleaning from above grade. Septic systems manufactured of other materials may be delivered in multiple pieces and require field assembly. That not only makes installation more difficult and time-consuming, it also increases the possibili- ty of leakage once the system is in operation. The installation and proper curing of cast -in -place tanks can be very time-consuming, taking days or weeks, as opposed to the one -day installation typi- cal for a Xerxes fiberglass tank. Xerxes tanks fit a variety of wastewater applications. They can be used as septic tanks, recirculation tanks, dosing tanks, pump tanks, holding tanks and tanks using prepackaged treatment systems. (Some typical applications are shown in these pages.) Xerxes tanks can be manufactured in sizes from 600 gallons to in excess of 60,000 gallons, with multiple compartments, and in single -wall, double -wall and triple -wall models. Whatever the application and whatever the size, each Xerxes fiberglass wastewater tank offers the same benefits: It is watertight, rustproof, corrosion -resistant and lightweight. A Xerxes tank is easy to install, easy to operate and easy to maintain. All in all, from delivery to operation, Xerxes offers customers a superior option for all their wastewater tank needs. Typical Wastewater Applications • Housing developments • Municipalities • Public parks • Rural developments • Sanitary stations • Rest areas and truck stops • Private RV parks • Resorts • Schools and recreation centers • Business parks 3 Dual -Compartment Septic Tank Applications When an application calls for more than one compartment in a pri- mary treatment system, Xerxes offers a dual - compartment fiberglass tank, which has two compartments with a baffle between them to control the waste stream. Xerxes also offers waste- water tanks with more than two compartments. When an application requires more than one �a compartment, other sys- tems may use a number of separate tanks, which increases the possibility of failed connections. This is an example of a definite advantage that customers have with Xerxes dual -compartment septic tanks. Compartment sizes can be configured in a variety of arrangements to meet design requirements. Recent Xerxes installations of dual -compartment septic tanks are residential septic systems in the desert, and septic systems in small business parks and schools. Large Commercial Septic Tank Applications When a customer needs a large commercial sep- tic system, a Xerxes tank can serve as the sole tank in a septic system or as the second tank in a two -tank septic system. This Xerxes tank has a major advantage over build -in -place or multi- ple -tank systems, which typically require several smaller tanks to create a large system. Xerxes access -opening designs can also accommodate multiple pump cham- bers that are often neces- sary in large commer- cial -size tanks. The Xerxes large com- mercial septic tank is a good fit for hotels and resorts where open green space is limited. Since Xerxes tanks are designed for H-20 load conditions, they can be installed under parking space. Recent installations of this type of Xerxes tank include a 150,000-gal- Ion/day treatment system for a resort community in the moun- tains and a 40,000-gallon/day treatment system for a conference center in the Midwest. 4 Recirculation Tank Applications One way of treating the waste stream is by recirculating the effluent through a filter (gravel, sand or peat, for instance). The common denominator in such secondary treatment systems is a recirculation tank. A Xerxes wastewater tank can be used in any system that requires recir- culation of the waste stream. Whether a wastewater cus- tomer is installing a new system or is retrofitting an existing sys- tem, a Xerxes recirculation tank, in which all waste liquids can be stored in one tank, is a superior option. Installing a Xerxes recirculation tank can eliminate the need to install a whole new septic system. Recirculation tanks can be designed and manufactured to fit spe- cific requirements for splitter valves and pumping equipment. Whether the system has a hanging pump chamber or a submerged pump mounted on a pump platform, Xerxes can provide a recir- culation tank and accessories to fit a customer's specific require- ments. If an application requires use of the entire tank capacity, Dosing Tank Applications Certain wastewater systems require a dosing tank. A Xerxes dosing tank is designed to receive the wastewater from a septic tank at two points in the process — after primary treat- ment and/or after secondary treatment — and then dis- pense of the effluent for final dispersal and/or disinfection. A Xerxes fiberglass dosing tank allows for the storage of surge capacity in the system and periodic dispersal of doses of effluent into the drain field in one of two ways — either elec- trically with a pump or mechanically with a siphon. Each Xerxes tank is manufac- tured with the same structural integrity designed to handle the pressures of continuous filling and emptying of the tank at specified burial depths. A watertight, corrosion -resistant Xerxes Xerxes also manufactures bottom sumps to meet this requirement. A typical example of a Xerxes recirculation tank application is a recently installed 10-foot-diameter, 30,000-gallon recirculation tank at a trailer park that previously had a concrete septic system that needed upgrading because of new regulations pertaining to existing secondary treatment systems. fiberglass tank is an excellent choice as a dosing tank in a waste- water system. 5 Prepackaged Treatment System Applications Many wastewater projects today are designed with an engineered prepackaged treatment system. These systems have a variety of designs, but all require a watertight, structurally strong, corro- sion -resistant storage vessel. Xerxes offers all the options in tank design needed to accommodate most treatment systems. Whether the engineered system is a sequenced batch reactor (SBR), aerobic treatment unit (ATU), membrane bio-reactor (MBR) or other technology, Xerxes offers a range of advantages and flexible design options. One of these advantages is providing the customer with a product assembled in the plant and shipped to the project site as a complete system. Xerxes installation of treatment components in the plant reduces or eliminates the requirement for tank entry in the field, thereby saving considerable installation time and expense. A confined space entry can be a costly step for the installer of the system. Also, because Xerxes assembles these components in a factory - controlled environment, the customer can receive a higher -quali- ty finished product than with the many variables created by field assembly and installation. Additionally, the use of Xerxes tanks for collection and disposal along with Xerxes tanks for treatment pro- vides the designer and/or owner with an entire system that is watertight and corrosion -resistant. In recent years, Xerxes has worked closely with many system suppliers to provide unique tank solutions for engineered prepackaged systems going to national park sites, housing developments, manufacturing facili- ties and schools. Other Wastewater Tank Applications Lightweight, watertight and corrosion -resistant fiberglass tanks are ideally suited to a variety of wastewater projects, whether they are in a rural community, a remote location or the middle of a city. Each Xerxes wastewater tank is designed and manufactured to meet a customer's specific requirements. Today, many Xerxes tanks are finding their way into neighborhoods as septic tanks for single-family homes. (See photo above.) Additional examples of recent Xerxes wastewater tank installa- tions are: 1) a wastewater holding system for an amphitheater in Washington state; 2) a recirculating, sand -filter wastewater treat- ment system for a Minnesota housing development; 3) surge tanks, settling tanks and lift station/pump tanks for a city sewer system in Missouri; and 4) 62,000-gallon tanks for a wastewater treatment system for a desert housing development in Arizona. 0 Optional Tank Accessories to Fit a Variety of Wastewater Applications One of the ways Xerxes continues to meet the changing needs of the marketplace is to meet the functional requirements of system designers and owners. When it comes to the wastewater market, Xerxes has developed a line of accessories to complement the full Access Openings Xerxes offers a variety of fiberglass access openings for wastewater tanks. The access open- ings serve a variety of purposes, includ- ing as inspection openings and as openings for efflu- ent filters (vaults). They are available in a range of sizes, from 24 inches to 48 inches in diameter and can include internal flanges to support pump vaults. Piping Connections Depending on the application, wastewater tanks require a variety of accessories for piping connections. Xerxes offers, in either PVC or FRP, inlet and outlet piping, and influent or effluent san- itary tees. These connections are manufactured to the size required for each application. Pump Platforms Depending on the type of system design, a Xerxes wastewater tank may require a submerged pump. Among the acces- sories Xerxes offers are pump platforms designed to support submerged pumps located in the bottom of the tank. range of its wastewater tanks. Shown here are just a few of these accessories, including access openings, piping connections, baf- fles/partition walls, sumps, risers and deadmen. nternal Baffles/Partition Walls Xerxes' internal baffles and partition walls can improve treatment performance in waste- water tanks by maxi- mizing the retention time of waste. These fiberglass accessories are designed and man- ufactured with the appropriate penetra- tions to fit the needs of specific applications. Other wastewater tank accessories To fit a variety of wastewater applica- tions, Xerxes provides a wide range of acces- sories. These include access risers (photo to right), large -diameter bottom sumps (photo below), reinforced - concrete deadmen, fiberglass hold-down straps and fiberglass or aluminum ladders. 7 Single -Wall Tank Data Nominal Capacity (gallons) Actual Capacity (gallons) Nominal Tank Length Nominal Shipping Weight (pounds) Number of Hold -Down Straps Required 4-Foot-Diameter Tanks 600 602 6'-11 7/8" 1 500 2 1,000 1,009 11'-3 7/8" 700 2 1,500 1,449 16'-0" 1,000 2 6-Foot-Diameter Tanks 1,500 1,779 10'-7 1/4" 800 2 2,000 2,376 13'-5 3/4" 1,000 2 3,000 2,973 16'-4 1/4" 1,200 2 4,000 4,131 21'-11 1/8" 1,600 2 5,000 5,064 26'-5" 1,900 4 6,000 5,960 30'-8 3/4" 2,200 4 8-Foot-Diameter Tanks 2,000 2,189 9'-1 /2" 900 2 3,000 3,271 12'-3" 1,200 2 4,000 4,218 15'-1/2" 1,400 2 5,000 5,165 17'-8 1 /2" 1,700 2 6,000 6,084 20'-6 1/2" 2,000 2 7,000 6,946 23'-1 " 2,200 4 8,000 7,950 26'-1/2" 2,500 4 9,000 8,869 28'-9" 2,700 4 10,000 9,816 31'-6 1/2" 3,000 4 11,000 10,763 34'-4" 3,200 4 12,000 11,682 37'-1 /2" 3,500 4 13,000 13,081 41'-2" 4,000 6 14,000 14,028 43'-11 1/2" 4,200 6 15,000 14,975 46'-9" 4,500 6 10-Foot-Diameter Tanks 10,000 10,563 21 '-5 1/4" 3,200 4 11,000 11,364 22'-9 3/4" 3,400 4 12,000 12,068 24'-1/4" 3,600 4 13,000 12,966 25'-6 3/4" 3,800 4 14,000 13,767 26'-11 1/4" 4,000 4 15,000 15,248 29'-5 3/4" 4,500 4 20,000 20,055 37'-8 3/4" 5,700 6 22,000 22,580 42'-3/4" 6,600 8 25,000 25,783 47'-6 3/4" 7,900 8 30,000 1 30,590 55'-9 3/4" 9,400 10 35,000 3 5, 397 64'-3/4" 10,500 12 40,000 41,004 73'-8 1/4" 12,100 14 12-Foot-Diameter Tanks 20,000 20,781 29'-4" 9,200 6 25,000 25,541 3 5'-7" 10,600 8 30,000 31,253 43'-1 " 12,500 10 35,000 36,013 49'-4" 13,900 12 40,000 39,821 54'-4" 15,000 12 48,000 48,389 65'-T 17,700 18 50,000 50,293 68'-1 " 18,300 18 Guide Specifications - Single -Wall FRP Tanks for Septic Use Short Form: 2. Resin used in tank and accessories shall be premium The contractor shall provide a single -wall fiberglass reinforced isophthalic polyester. plastic (FRP) underground storage tank as shown on the draw- D. Tank Dimensions (Refer to Xerxes literature on gallonage.): ings. Sizes and fittings shall be as shown. The tank shall be a 1. Tank shall have nominal capacity of gallons. fiberglass tank as manufactured by Xerxes Corporation. 2. Tank shall have nominal outside diameter of feet. Tank shall be tested and installed according to the Xerxes Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines in effect at time of installation. Long Form: Part I: General 1.01 Quality Assurance A. Acceptable Manufacturer: Xerxes Corporation B. Governing Standards, as applicable: 1. Tank manufacturer shall be in the business of manu- facturing tanks to Underwriters Laboratories, Inc. (UL) Standard 1316. 2. Tank manufacturer shall be in the business of manu- facturing tanks conforming to the requirements of ANSI/AWWA D120 Thermosetting Fiberglass - Reinforced Plastic Tanks. Part II: Products 2.01 Single -Wall Fiberglass Reinforced Plastic (FRP) Underground Storage Tanks: A. Loading Conditions - Standard tank design shall meet the following criteria: 1. Internal Load -Tank shall be designed to withstand a 5-psig air -pressure test (3 psig for a 12'-diameter tank) with a 5:1 safety factor. When tank is designed for on -site testing, contractor shall individually test tank for leakage prior to installation. Maximum test pressure is 5 psig (3 psig for a 12'-diameter tank). 2. Surface Loads - Tank shall withstand surface H-20 axle loads when properly installed according to tank manufacturer's current Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines. 3. External Hydrostatic Pressure -Tank shall be capa- ble of being buried in ground with 7' of overburden over the top of the tank, the hole fully flooded and a safety factor of 5:1 against general buckling. 4. Tank shall support accessory equipment - such as inlet and outlet piping, effluent filter chamber, lad- ders and baffles - when installed according to tank manufacturer's current Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines. B. Product Storage: 1. Tank shall be capable of storing wastewater products limited to the collection and storage of human solid or liquid organic sewage. 2. Tank shall be vented to atmospheric pressure. 3. Tank shall be capable of storing products identified in the manufacturer's current standard limited warranty. C. Materials: 1. Tank shall be manufactured with 100% resin and glass -fiber reinforcement. No sand fillers. 2.02 Accessories A. Piping: 1. Schedule 40 PVC or FRP pipe shall be used for inlet and outlet piping. 2. When a PVC pipe is affixed to the tank, a fiberglass lay-up is used. 3. All piping shall be factory -sealed to enable field tight- ness testing with at least one pipe opening provided with a threaded fitting for connecting a pressure -test manifold. B. Access Openings: 1. All access openings 24 inches in diameter or larger shall be manufactured of FRP. 2. Location(s) shall be as shown on tank drawings. 3. Optional riser extensions shall be FRP or PVC. 4. With tanks designed for on -site tightness testing, all access openings shall be factory -sealed to enable field tightness testing. C. Optional Anchor Straps: 1. Straps shall be FRP anchor straps as supplied by tank manufacturer. 2. Number and location of straps shall be specified in current literature by tank manufacturer. D. Optional Ladders: 1. Ladders shall be the standard ladder as supplied by tank manufacturer. E. Optional Fittings: 1. All threaded fittings shall be constructed of carbon steel or FRP. 2. All standard threaded fittings shall be half -couplings and shall be 2", 4" or 6" in diameter. Reducers are to be used for smaller sizes where shown and provided by contractor. 3. All FRP and PVC nozzles shall be flat -faced and flanged, and shall conform to ANSI B16.5 150# bolting pattern. E Optional Internal Pump Platforms: 1. Pump platforms shall be FRP. 2. Contact tank manufacturer with pump details, such as dimensions and weight Part III: Testing and Installation 3.01 Testing A. Testing -Tank shall be tested according to the Xerxes Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines in effect at time of installation. B. Optional Testing -Prior to installation, a tank -tightness test consisting of a 5 psig air pressure/soap test shall be performed (3 psig for 12-foot-diameter tanks) per the tank testing procedures outlined in the Xerxes Guide Specifications — Single -Wall FRP Tanks for Septic Use Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines in effect at time of installation. 3.02 Installation A. Contractor shall be trained in proper installation proce- dures by the tank manufacturer, the state or other approved agency. Limited Warranty Underground Septic Tanks B. Tank shall be installed according to the Xerxes Installation Manual and Operating Guidelines in effect at time of installation. Part IV: Warranty 4.01 Warranty A. Warranty shall be manufacturer's standard limited warranty for underground septic tanks in effect at time of purchase. Xerxes Corporation ("Xerxes") warrants to ("Owner") that our underground septic tanks, and all Xerxes manufactured septic tank accessories, if installed, used and maintained in the United States in accordance with Xerxes' published specifications, installation instructions and operating guidelines, all applicable laws and regulations, and the limited septic applications defined herein, will be free from material defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one (1) year from date of original delivery by Xerxes. Septic applications for purposes of this warranty are limited to the collection and storage of solid or liquid organic sewage and wastewater at temperatures not to exceed 140' F. If any tank is to be removed from an installation, moved to Owner's new location and is intended for active service at the new loca- tion, the tank must be recertified by Xerxes in order to maintain the warranty as originally extended. The foregoing warranty does not extend to tanks or accessories (collectively "Goods") damaged due to acts of God, war, terrorism, or failure of Goods caused, in whole or in part, by misuse, improper installation, storage, servicing, maintenance, or operation in excess of their rated capacity, contrary to their recommended use, or contrary to the septic applications defined above, whether intentional or otherwise, or any other cause or damage of any kind not the fault of Xerxes. Xerxes only warrants repairs or alterations performed by Xerxes or its authorized contrac- tors. Xerxes does not warrant any product, components or parts manufactured by others. XERXES' OBLIGATIONS UNDER THIS LIMITED WARRANTY ARE NULL AND VOID IF A TANK HAS BEEN USED FOR PRODUCTS CONTAIN- ING A "HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE" AS DEFINED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION AND LIABILI- TY ACT OF 1980 (CERCLA OR "SUPERFUND") WHICH DESIGNATES CERTAIN CHEMICALS AS "HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES." SEE 42 UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION § 9601 (14). Owner's sole and exclusive remedy for breach of warranty is limited at Xerxes' option to: (a) repair of the defective tank or accessory, (b) delivery of replacement tank or accessory to the point of original delivery, or (c) refund of the original purchase price. A claimant must give Xerxes the opportunity to observe and inspect the tank and/or accessory prior to removal from the ground or the claim will be forever barred. All claims must be made in writing within one (1) year after tank and/or accessory failure or be forever barred. THE FOREGOING LIMITED WARRANTY CONSTITUTES XERXES' EXCLUSIVE OBLIGATION AND XERXES MAKES NO OTHER WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, WITH RESPECT TO THE TANK OR ANY SERVICE, ADVICE, OR CONSULTATION, IF ANY, FUR- NISHED TO OWNER BY XERXES OR ITS REPRESENTATIVES, WHETHER AS TO MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PUR- POSE, OR OTHERWISE. THE SELLER (XERXES) UNDERTAKES NO RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE QUALITY OF THE GOODS, EXCEPT AS OTH- ERWISE PROVIDED IN THIS CONTRACT. THE SELLER (XERXES) ASSUMES NO RESPONSIBILITY THAT THE GOODS WILL BE FIT FOR ANY PARTICULAR PURPOSE FOR WHICH YOU (OWNER) MAY BE BUYING THESE GOODS, EXCEPT AS OTHERWISE PROVIDED IN THE CON- TRACT. THE REMEDIES SET FORTH IN THE ABOVE LIMITED WARRANTY ARE THE ONLY REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO ANY PERSON OR ENTITY FOR BREACH OF WARRANTY OR FOR BREACH OF ANY OTHER COVENANT, DUTY, OR OBLIGATION ON THE PART OF XERXES. XERXES SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY OR OBLIGATION TO ANY PERSON OR ENTITY FOR BREACH OF ANY OTHER COVENANT, DUTY, OR OBLIGATION UNDER THIS LIMITED WARRANTY EXCEPT AS EXPRESSLY SET FORTH HEREIN. IT IS EXPRESSLY AGREED THAT THIS LIMIT- ED WARRANTY DOES NOT FAIL OF ITS ESSENTIAL PURPOSE. XERXES SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR COSTS OF INSTALLATION OR REMOVAL OF GOODS, ENVIRONMENTAL CONTAMINATION, FIRES, EXPLOSIONS, OR ANY OTHER CONSEQUENCES ALLEGEDLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO A BREACH OF WARRANTY, OR INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR OTHER DAMAGES OF ANY DESCRIP- TION, WHETHER ANY SUCH CLAIM OR DAMAGES BE BASED UPON WARRANTY, CONTRACT, NEGLIGENCE, STRICT LIABILITY OR OTHER TORT, OR OTHERWISE. IN NO EVENT SHALL XERXES' TOTAL LIABILITY HEREUNDER EXCEED THE ORIGINAL PURCHASE PRICE OF THE GOODS WHICH GAVE RISE TO SUCH LIABILITY. Consumer Notice: This Limited Warranty gives you (Owner) specific legal rights. You (Owner) may also have other rights which vary from state to state. Effective: 1 /1 /07 IN Xerxes Manufacturing Facilities Anaheim, CA Phone 714.630.0012 Fax 714.632.7133 Sequin, TX Phone 830.372.0090 Fax 830.372.0321 Hagerstown, MD Phone 301.223.6933 Fax 301.223.6836 Tipton, IA Phone 563.886.6172 Fax 563.886.2042 XERXES® CORPORATION a subsidiary of ZCL Composites Inc. 7901 Xerxes Avenue South I Minneapolis I MN 1 55431-1288 Ph:952.887.1890 Fax:952.887.1882 ZCL Manufacturing Facilities Edmonton, AB Phone 800.661.8265 Fax 780.466.6126 Drummondville, QC Phone 800.661.8265 Fax 780.466.6126 Phone 800.661.8265 Fax 780.466.6126 111h, Hagerstown, MD www.xerxescorp.com © 2008 Xerxes Corporation XWW10/08pp 4 International Wastewater Technologies XW% 1931-A Kahai Street Phone 808-833-2298 Honolulu, HI 96819 Fax 808-842-7719 E-Mail sales@iwt-epw.com Bill To Bow Engineering & Development, INC. Mandi Chang 1953 South Beretania Street, #PH -A Honolulu, HI 96826 Phone 808-369-8213 Fax Quote Quote 0013571 Date 4/1 /2020 Sales rep Page 1 of 1 Ship To Milolii, Beach Park Purchase Order Ship Via FOB Job Product WIH I F Description Xerxes Holding Tank 8'D,1 Main Xerxes Holding Tank 8'D,10k gallons; 4" PVC Ok sanitary tee INLET; NO BAFFLE WALL; 4-ea 24"D manways with 24"D x 12"H PVC access risers and 24 " Fiberglass bolt down lid -NON -TRAFFIC. Xerxes Deadmen 8' x 10k Main Xerxes Deadmen for 8-ft Diameter x 10,000 Gallon Kit Single Wall FRP Tank. Kit includes 4-ea 16-ft concrete deadmen , 4-ea Standard Hold down straps ; and 8-ea Turnbuckles Xerxes Holding Tank 8'D,5 Main Xerxes Holding Tank 8'D,5k gallons; 4" PVC sanitary k tee INLET; NO BAFFLE WALL; 2-ea 24"D manways with 24"D x 12"H PVC access risers and 24" Fiberglass bolt down lid -NON -TRAFFIC. Xerxes Deadmen 8' x 5k Main Xerxes Deadmen for 8-ft Diameter x 5,000 Gallon Kit Single Wall FRP Tank. Kit includes 2-ea 16-ft concrete deadmen , 2-ea Standard Hold down straps ; and 4-ea Turnbuckles Alarm Package Main Alarm Package: 1-ea Normally Open, Wide Angle Float 1-ea Battery operated Alarm Panel *DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY INSTALLATION* Shipping & Handling Main Shipping and Handling Estimate. Any differences will be invoiced accordingly. Shipping and delivery to job site of both 5k and 1 Ok tanks. CONTRACTOR TO OFFLOAD. Contractor/Cus Main Contractor/Customer Responsibilities. IWT not Responsibilities responsible for unverified items, quantities, and any associated shipping costs. Contractor/Customer is responsible to verify all items, quantities, and shipping costs. TERMS & CONDITIONS Contact Terms Kelsie Sasabe Due on receipt Ordered I Price Amount 1.00 ea 30,547.84ea $30,547.84 1.00 ea 9,750.00ea $9,750.00 1.00 ea 18,817.42ea $18,817.42 1.00 ea 4,875.00ea $4,875.00 1.00 ea 575.00ea $575.00 1.00 ea 13,834.93ea $13,834.93 1.00 ea O.00ea $0.00 Order will proceed with a signed copy of this quote and 50% deposit. 25% is due when items ship. 25% due before tank can be delivered. Lead times: -After receipt of signed quote and 50% deposit, allow 2 weeks to produce construction drawings. -After signed constructions are received, allow 4-6 weeks for production PLUS transit time. This quote valid for 30 days. Items are subject to prior sale. Prices do not include installation or any professional services - unless otherwise stated. Order will proceed only when quote is signed, dated and returned to IWT. Accounts not paid within terms are subject to a 1.5% monthly service charge. Any Sub -total $78,400.19 discrepancies must be reported within 7 days of receiving materials. Any returns must have prior approval. Returns may be subject to a 25% restocking fee. ALL SALES FINAL ON SPECIAL ORDERS. There will be a $25.00 fee for returned checks. Make checks payable to: International Wastewater Technologies. A Sales tax $3,694.22 storage fee may be incurred with items not picked up within 2 weeks. A 3% service charge will be added for credit card charges of $5,000 or more. Total $82,094.41 * QUOTE IS AUTHORIZED AND APPROVED BY: Signature: Date: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 3 EVAPORATIVE TOILET SYSTEM Feasibility Study Page 73 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Enviro SSA Loo sWs� Enviro Loo C-60 Configuration & Specifications 12112mm 1 83.17m — i [3629n1 I II II II, [9.7 09.JSin TOP VIEW Vent Stack `Outer Lid Wall Swing [96Jmm 38.05in /+ , [J3JmmI Aa/ 29.00in � Il/I / Typ Grade L 7.717 [3a9mm] ma ,� A 4/ AI [l000ml ,ii,/ m m [1J8mmI 138mmi coin mm � J.00in 11 I I 130 �0-1-25-" 1 [J62mm] 30.00in SIDE VIEW Enviro Loo USA/SWSLoo, Inc. 2005 FM 1704, Elgin, Texas 78621 Capability: 60 uses per day, 21,900 per year Tank Length inside 76.5 inches, 1945 mm Tank Width inside 29.5 inches, 750 mm Height of unit to exhaust stack flange 51.5 inches, 1308 mm Maximum burial depth to mating flange 30 inches, 762 mm Total Air Volume of unit 44 Cu Ft. Maximum liquid volume to mating flange 240 gallons Liquid Volume to bottom of drying tray 80 gallons Evaporation efficiency is reduced between 50 & 75 gallons If liquid level approaches the bottom of drying tray, unit should be pumped by a vacuum truck. A -1 END VIEW www.swsloo.com SECTION A —A 512.285.9494/FAX 512.281.3436 THE F.NVIKO LOO � Model: CommercialC-60 Enviro 0 JUSA Installation INSTRUCTIONS Exhaust Stacks Manhole/Accessto Unit Top of unit Interior ledge for Drying tray Enviro 4b USA Page 1 of 9 — Exhaust Stack Bracket Toilet with toilet seat Bottom of Unit Please call us if you have any questions. It is very important that the Eloos are assembled correctly. We are always happy to help. Thank you for your business. Toll Free: 866-797-3566 Or: 512-285-9494 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 Parts and Pieces Inside Your Shipment If your unit has been shipped unassembled, please see assembly instructions prior to installation instructions. However, if you've already assembled the unit, or it was shipped assembled, please follow the directions to insert the Inlet Vents and Inlet Vent Pipes prior to actual installation. Poly Turbine Enzyme 5tarter Toilet with Toilet Seat Cleaner Drying Bag Anchor Cables Exhaust Stacks and Rake 4 X Cable Clamps and Exhaust Stack Bracket 12 X Self -tapping (#8) screws Inlet Vents — consisting of 2X Inlet Vent Pipes and 2 X Inlet Vents. (These must be fitted together, and secured, prior to installation.) Page 2 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 Inlet Vent Installation 1.) The inlet vents come separated, as pipes - usually in exhaust stack, and the vent pieces - usually in the drying bag. They have been marked for your convenience. Inlet vent — X 2, usually placed in Drying Bag for shipment nlet Vent Pipe —X 2 Both the Inlet Vents and the Inlet Vent Pipes have been marked for your convenience. The Inlet Vents will be placed from outside the unit. whilethe Inlet Vent Pipes are placed inside the unit. These pieces can be matched by using the lines provided. You will need to place the Inlet Vent Pipes inside the unit. The bottom of the pipes will pass through the drying tray through the designated slots. Insert the Inlet Vents into the opening of the unit, from the outside, then reaching through the manhole/access to unit, bring the inlet vent pipe upwards, attaching the white fitting over the back of the inlet vent. Fitting at the top of the' Inlet Vent Pipe. This will attach to the Inlet Vent. Insert Inlet Vent Pipes into Inlet Vent Pipe slots in drying tray. Turn the Fitting, at the top of the Pipe towards ee He P�F the outside wall of unit, where it will be attached to the Inlet Vent Place the Inlet Vent into the Inlet Vent Opening fi orn the outside of the unit The inserted end will attach to the Fitting at the top of the Inlet Vent Pipe inside the unit. Page 3 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 ELoo Installation Instructions Once your ELoo has the Inlet Vents inserted, permanently secure them using PVC pipe glue or a #8 Self -tapping screw. **Make sure fittings are fully seated.** --~� When locatingthe ELoo, ensurethatthe inspection cover receives the maximum N +s� 1 possible sunlight by placing the unit on the South -side (in the northern hemisphere). Exhaust Flange Manhole/Access to Unit Toilet Flange 0 ** To prevent construction materials and other undesirable material entering the ELoo during installation —COVER Toilet Flange and Exhaust Flange and keep Manhole/Maintenance Hatch closed. Covers have been provided for you and should remain in place for surround construction.** A.) Underground Installation Excavate a pit: 8.5' 1 X 4' w X 24-30" h (2600mm X 1200mm X 750mm). Ensure accurate alignment & height to final floor level. Note: If the units are outside toilet structures, we recommend a step-up of 8" inches (200mm) to avoid storm water run-off. - Remove rocks from the bottom of the pit that may cause damage to the unit. Use roughly 2" (50mm) river sand or soft soil to level the bottom of the pit. If installing the unit in clay or high groundwater area, concrete footings can be poured in the bottom of the pit leaving exposed rebarb or adding hooks for securing tie downs for the anchor cables provided. **See Urinal Instructions if you are adding a Urinal to your Installation.** Page 4 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 N Lower the assembled unit into the pit. The red arrow shows the position of suggested ground level. (1' or 12" (300mm) from ground level to base of inspection hole cover.) Note: If urinal is to be added, connect piping to the unit by drilling a hole below the ledge for the drying tray & installing a bulkhead connector. Do this before backfilling the excavation. ***The unit MUST to be anchored to avoid floatation.*** Attach anchors level and evenly on either side of the bottom of the unit. (Position rear anchor cable between unit and inverted bolts.) When backfilling, ensure anchors remain in position. Set rear Anchor Cable between unit and Inverted 1 %2" bolt. Attach the Anchor Cables to concrete blocks (or appropriate anchoring for soil conditions) using the 4 Cable Clamps provided. The ELoo MUST be anchored to prevent floatation. Page 5 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 I u Use a soil-crete or medium heavy foaming soil (class III) for backfilling. Backfill evenly and compact gently all around the unit. Ensure that the unit stays level through its length and breadth. During backfill procedures, ensure that the drying tray remains in place on the supporting ledge. Do not compact backfill over the level of the tray, without ensuring the above. Make sure that the container sides do not bulge inwards from over compaction (white arrows), by viewing through the inspection cover or by standing on the sides of the drying plate inside the container. "Note": Ensure that the prevailing geo-technical conditions have been checked and that adequate stabilization procedures have been specified to prevent flotation and/or damage to the unit. B.)Above ground Installation Please call SWSLoo, Inc 866-797-3566 Or 512-285-9494 Additionally you can email: George@swsloo.com Page 6 of 9 @ SWSLoo, Inc 2014 Building Slab For ELoo Surround The interiorface of the rear wall should be built 11— 13" inches (315mm) from the center of the toilet \ flange. 11— 13" FM7 Pour foundations on left and right sides of the unit to carry the back wall lintels. These specifications must be supplied by the contractor and/or engineer responsible for the installation and/or construction. Location of the back wall lintels (Side view) U Ground Level > -Position batter boards to pour floor slab to ensure that approximately +/- 1 %2" inches (40mm) of the toilet flange protrudes above the finished floor level for mating the toilet bowl to the unit. - Pour the floor slab according to the engineer's specifications. **Completed structure MUST have a vent** Optional: Cast a sloping concrete shoulder apron around the inspection hole end of the unit for storm water control and to prevent seepage into the backfill material. Page 7 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 Installation of Remaining Components: Tnilat- Depending on the final Position/secure the toilet bowl floor level, excess onto the toilet flange protruding protruding toilet flange from the floor slab; adhere with may need to be cut off contractor's cement and/or or a riser added. bolts/screws. The base of the Secure toilet seat and toilet bowl lid on the plastic bolts MUST rest on on the toilet as per the the floor slab. instructions on the box. Exhaust Stacks: Install the exhaust stack without a collar over the flange an the top of the unit. It will be a tight fit but it will completely cover the flange. Secure the stack to the flange with 4 of the 48 self -tapping screws provided. Position the exhaust stack bracket as high as possible on the rear wall for maximum support and ensure the exhaust stack is straight & vertical as indicated. Page 8 of 9 Secure the turbine to the second exhaust stack section, securing with 48 Self -tapping screws. Then fit the collared end to the first stack with the 48 self - tapping screws provided. The ventilation extraction unit/turbine must be positioned above the pitch of the roof to ensure adequate and consistent ventilation. © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 Drying Bag and Rake: Enzyme• Your ELoo is now ready to be used! Position the drying bag by sliding it into position on top of the inlet pipes housing as shown letting the handle rest in the hook to keep it in place. Secure the inspection cover when completed. (Instructionsfor use of the drying bag supplied with the Maintenance Instructions.) Pour the contents of the bag of organic starter enzyme through the toilet bowl when first used. Position the rake by setting the rake to the side of the drying tray (between inlet pipe and side of unit) and placing handle in hook provided. Keep lid closed at all times when the toilet is not in use to insure the primary air flow is through the exterior inlet vents. Auxiliary Items available for purchase from SWSLoo, Inc (including an auxiliary fan to assist with air flow and a urinal). Page 9 of 9 © SWSLoo, Inc 2014 5OUTHM5T5UT1C LOO, INC Allanufacturers anal %distributors ofLlWiro L oo MAINTENANCE INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE ENVIRO LOO Enviro Loo owners or their employees can comfortably perform these maintenance tasks themselves. The maintenance schedule depends largely on the volume of usage and climatic conditions. While high usage units may need to be serviced and waste removed more often, the lower usage unit will need attention less frequently. PERIODIC — MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE 1. Open the rear external inspection cover. The drying bag should rest on top of the inlet pipes, retained in place by the inverted hook on the forward wall of the unit. The small hook of the left side of the unit is for storing the rake. 2. Check that the liquid level is below the drying tray and that the system is in an aerobic state of operation, i.e. liquid waste is separated from solid waste by the drying tray. Spread out any build up of solid waste from the slide plate and forward section of the drying tray towards the open rear -end section of the drying tray using the rake provided. 3. Each section of the drying tray can be considered a stage or level of drying, with the bag being the last stage before removal. Accumulation of solid waste, paper, etc., the residue, can be removed from the unit with the rake and drying bag or large dust pan. 4. Drying bag can be emptied into a large plastic bag or bucket and safely disposed of with other household waste. If the solids are still damp the bag may be returned to the top of the unit to continue drying. 5. Ensure free operation of the wind turbine on top of the external vent pipe. 6. Ensure free airflow to side inlet pipes. 7. If equipped, ensure audio/visual alarm works properly. 8. In the event of exceptional accumulation of liquid, vacuum out and remove the liquid from the liquid holding area below the drying tray. This is accomplished by inserting a pipe or hose through the service hole located in the back end of the drying tray. If necessary the white perforated panel in the tray can be temporarily removed for cleaning. TOOLS REQUIRED FOR MAINTENANCE PROCEDURE • Long handle narrow head or metal rake and locally purchased large shop -type dust pan not more than 18" wide if no bag is provided. • Plastic container/bag for safe removal of waste from the site SAFETY CLOTHING • Sanitary gloves • Facemask • Hairnet, rubber boots, Overalls (if required by site or local authorities) DAILY CLEANING Inside toilet cubicle ensure that normal hygienic cleaning procedures are maintained on a daily and regular basis. Mix 2 oz cleaner with non -chlorinated water in a 16 oz spray bottle. PROCEEDURE: • The toilet bowl must be cleaned using only the organic cleaner provided and a damp toilet brush -no chemical detergents should enter the unit. Spray toilet bowl, scrub, spray. • Toilet seat may be cleaned with regular chemical detergents while ensuring that excess liquids do not enter the toilet bowl. • Ensure that the toilet lid is left in the closed position after each use and after cleaning the toilet bowl. 2005 FM 1704 www.swstoo.com 512.285.9494 Elgin, Texas 78621 11.13.14 FAX 512.281.3436 Kelsie Sasabe From: Jeri Witta <jeri@swsloo.com> Sent: Monday, April 6, 2020 6:32 AM To: Kelsie Sasabe Subject: Information on the Eloo Attachments: C60 specs 2_Logo.pdf Kelsie: Thank you so much for getting back in touch with us about the Eloo. I have checked my files and found that we received an order from Brigham Young University in Hawaii for a C-60 Commercial Eloo in December 2019. We have not shipped because of all this Corona Virus mess but communications with them indicates that they are still planning on the purchase. Other sales to Hawaii have been private residences/cabins. The C-60 Commercial Eloo sells for $4,250.00 + shipping. If you will send me the destination zip code I will be happy to get you a shipping estimate. In addition, if you are planning on using the Eloos as Unisex units, I strongly recommend the addition of a urinal. This will speed up the people through the unit and we have found that ladies are less reluctant to use a unit that has a urinal in it. This would add about $125.00 to the cost of the unit. Instead of sinks, I assume with water, could you use the waterless handcleaner? We are all very failiar with that rught now. The State of Texas allows that instead of the traditional sink. Please get back with me if you have additional questions. Sorry for the delay in response but I wanted to check through my files for activity in Hawaii. Best regards and stay safe, Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 4 PREFABRICATED WATERLESS RESTROOM Feasibility Study Page 86 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park STRUCTURE SPECIFICATIONS FOR STANDARD OUTBACK WRS VAULT EVAPORATORTM RESTROOM FACILITY SPECIAL PROVISIONS - BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION Basic Considerations SAMPLE A. Furnishing a plant -fabricated restroom and foundation/vault, installed in accordance with this and other sections of these specifications. The structure must meet or exceed these specifications. B. The contractor will furnish and install plant fabricated facility, Model #OUTBACK National Value Engineered Structures by Biological Mediation Systems, LLC., Ft. Collins, CO 80526, 1-800-524-1097. C. The building and foundation/vault must be engineered and prefabricated, including building structure, foundation/vault, wiring, and other elements shown on the drawings. Building supplier must be registered to build prefabricated buildings in the state in which they are manufactured. The building shall be factory constructed on a precast concrete slab. D. The building will be shrink wrapped for protection during transportation. During transportation if rain or snow is encountered the building may arrive dirty. Cleaning the building will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. The contractorlowner will be responsible for touch up painting and repair from screws and nails used to attach shrink wrap. Touch up paint will be provided. Site Preparation, Excavation and Fill A. Initial site preparation will be under the direction of the governing agency (owner), i.e., removal of existing lawns, shrubs, or dirt in the area of the building. B. All materials and design of walkways, ramps, railings, piers and/or column footings will be provided by contractorlowner. C. The crane for oft loading and setting the structure onsite will be the responsibility of the contractor/owner. One hour will be allowed for off loading. Additional charges will be billed to the contractorlowner for delays. A spreader bar assembly will be required. The dimensions for the lifting points are outlined on a shop drawing. These must be reviewed by the crane company for clarification as to the requirements of the spreader bar assembly. Contractor/owner will provide a clear and safe access to the building site for the delivery truck. This includes narrow bridges, limited weight bridges, low overhead obstructions and all traffic control if needed. If access cannot be provided via delivery truck, the contractorlowner will take delivery at an alternate site and will be responsible forfinal transportation to the job site. The pick-up lifts for the building slab will be provided by BMS. A deposit will be required for the lifts. The deposit will be returned when the lifts are returned to BMS. Utility Hook -Ups A. The main electrical supply, connection, meter and disconnect will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. The main electrical supply can be brought through the exterior wall of the building, or as designated on the plans. Anchoring of the Restroom A. Anchoring the restroom to the foundation shall be per manufacturers drawings and specifications including weld plates between the floor slab and vault to be supplied by BMS and field installed by the contractor/owner. BUILDING MATERIAL I CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION A. The structure shall be National Value Engineered Structures Model #OUTBACK, by Biological Mediation Systems, LLC. B. The structure shall consist of two factory constructed units, the building and the vault. The vault shall be a water tight vault with a factory installed spray in two part 100% solid polyurethane chemical resistant liner. The vault shall be built by a precast company that is currently certified by the National Precast Concrete Association. All necessary connections between the building and foundation/vault will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. The restroom module shall be factory constructed complete with trusses, decking and roofing materials. C. The structure shall be designed under the direct supervision of a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of and all plans shall bear his seal. D. The owner will be responsible for all licenses, permits, taxes and approvals. 1. Precast Concrete Floor System and FoundationNault A. Restroom floor: The floor shall be a one piece structural monolithic precast concrete slab manufactured in a closed environmentally controlled plant. Concrete to develop 5,000 psi in 28 days. The floor slab shall be designed and engineered with pick-up points for possible future relocation. The slab shall be 6" thick concrete with a 6" steel angle around the pick-up points of the slab, the floor finish shall have a non-skid broom finish. After the slab is cured it will be sealed with a two part epoxy coating. Anchor bolts shall be 518" with 2 x 2 x 3/16 plate washers. The anchor bolts will be embedded in a minimum 4" of concrete, the walls will be installed directly on concrete. Installation of walls on ferrous (steel) surfaces will not be permitted. Floor drains will be precast into the slab. B. Foundation shall be manufactured in a closed environmentally controlled plant. Construction shall be 6" thick concrete floor with 4" concrete walls. Concrete to develop 6,000 psi in 28 days. The floor slab shall be designed and engineered with pick-up points for possible future relocation. C. There will be four (4) weld plates cast into the top of the vault. 4" x'/" x 6". BMS will provide four (4) 2" x %" x 6" weld plates that must be welded onsite by the contractor/owner. This will complete the connection between the floor slab and the foundation/vault. D. Bidders must have minimum 3 years experience in building these floor systems. The floor system shall be built by a precast company that is currently certified by the National Precast Concrete Association. 11. Wood (Structural wood members to be S.Y.P., S.P.F., or Hem Fir) A. Wall Framing: Nominal 2 x 4 and 2 x 6 at nominal 16" on center. Walls shall be built in single piece sections for lamination of the FRP interior wall system. All nails for structural framing shall be mechanically galvanized. B. Roof Framing: Engineered trusses. C. Roof Sheathing: 15132 "CDX" plywood. Ill. Thermal and Moisture Protection A. Roofing Material: Shall be 26 ga. metal roofing with matching trim, factory installed. Color to be chosen by owner from standard color chart (26 GA/Colorfast 45' Finish). It shall be installed over 30# roof underlayment per manufacturer's recommendations. B. Soffit/fascia: 26 ga. metal to match roof color. C. Drip Edge: 3" X 3" 26 ga. metal to match roof color. D. Sealants: 100% silicone sealant & latex paintable caulk. E. Insulation R Value: Wall Ceiling Other F. Moisture Barrier: 30# felt 2 IV. Finishes A. Restroom Interior. Vandal resistant seamless sanitary wall system. Product shall be Kemlite® with Surfaseal®. Fiberglass reinforced plastic wall system, floor to ceiling, corner to corner void of molding and drive rivet fasteners. Will not mildew, rot or rust. Easy to clean, resistant to high moisture and corrosive environment, can be scrubbed or steam cleaned. Graffiti and scratch resistant, color white. 3132" thick, class A fire rated, pebble grain finish, fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) laminated to ACX Plywood. B. Restroom Ceiling: Ceiling shall be fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP). Color white. C. Interior Wall Corner: 1'h" x 1'/ ", 930 stainless steel, fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. D. Base: 4" x Ma" extruded aluminum 6063-T6, clear anodized finish, with eased top edge, fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. E. Exterior Siding: F. Paint and/or staining: Color to be chosen by owner. The contractor/owner will be responsible for on site touch up painting and filling of any holes. G. Corner Trim: Nardi Trim®, color to be chosen by owner. H. Base Trim: Hardi Trim®, color to be chosen by owner. V. Doors & Windows A. Material: Doors shall be 18 gauge steel, frames shall be16 gauge steel. Frames shall have a wrap around design to cover the exterior and interior wall. B. Hardware: All hardware shall meet ADA. 1. Closure: LCN146128 2. Deadbolts: Schlage B663 3. Door Lever: Schlage Rhodes D40S 4. Hagar Hinges ECB61100 5. Door Sweep MM1480A C. Windows: 12" x 48" 16 gauge metal windows with 1/" translucent Lexan®. The Lexan® product shall have a Five-year warranty against breakage. D. Wall Vents: 16 gauge metal with'/" bird and bug screen VI. Electrical A. EMT or MC cable throughout. B. Underground Sleeve. Schedule 40 grey PVC, by contractor/owner. C. Panel: Siemens GF221NR D. Outlet: Leviton GFI. E. Nema 3 Enclosure: 242410. F. Power Converter: Magnateck Model 6509. G. Restroom Lights: CVD-132EL with T815watt LED lamps, polycarbonate tense, and 16 gauge cold rolled steel with corrosion resistant white baked enamel finish. H. 12 Volt Exhaust Fan: Papst 1224. I. Light Timer: Intermatic Model STO1 C. 3 VIL Specialties 1. 18" Grab Bar: 11/2" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. 2. 36" Grab Bar: 1'/2" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. 3. 42" Grab Bar: 11/" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. 4. Fixtures: H18 fiberglass toilet. 5. Toilet Paper Holders: BMS Model D-H2,1/" thick stainless steel, exposed roll type with locking device and fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. Owner to supply pad lock. Vlll. Waste Reduction System The system shall include the Model WRS Vault Evaporator TM (patent #5,573,661). The WRS system shall include the evaporator unit, vent pipe, roof mounted ventilator and factory installed spray in 2 part 100% solid polyurethane chemical resistant liner. The contractor/owner will be responsible for installing additional vent pipe and roof curb after the building has been delivered. The contractor/owner will also be responsible for installing the roof vent fan and final electrical connection to the fan. Approved Equals The (AGENCY) shall determine all approved equals. In order to be considered an approved equal the following criteria must be met: 1. Manufacturers Literature: Submit complete manufacturer's literature and technical data. 2. Certification: Submit, via transmittal, properly identified with project name, location and date, certification of manufacturers compliance with the requirements specified herein signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of 3. Submit a complete set of construction drawings signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of 4. Submit (2) two, twelve inch, samples and specification sheets on the following items, basement materials, roof decking, laminated beams, fascia, interior finish, and exterior siding. Note: Materials must meet specifications. 5. Provide (3) three location and contacts of similar buildings of this nature, built within the last six months. 6. All equals must be approved (10) ten days before the bid date. 7. All approved equals shall be notified with written statements of their approval. Manufacturers shall not bid this project without this written notification. Product Insurance 1. Manufacturer to provide minimum $2,000,000 PROD UCTICOMPLETED OPERATIONS coverage. 2. Carrier providing the coverage is rated BEST'S rating A or higher. 3. PRODUCT/COMPLETED OPERATIONS is an "occurrence" form basis. 4. Insurance certificate stating insurance coverage and compliance with the above requirements shall be submitted. 02/23/17 4 All Rights Reserved C./A-AD C 'tM 11 LAP SIDING.DWG RAWINGS � RGMO/UCTJACKS OJPilAC< DC 3 BMS WRS VAULT EVAPORATION SYSTEM $ Q PATENT NO. 5,573,661 f� 1 y&X� � LL Q mI gigs mQ OLAR PANELS TO �N (, �F'CE SOU I" 1 c51Y1/ 7 C" SLAB- P1 _0" SOLAR "' ONTROL8"m h [LllESSBOX4 CH � �m MP a a ------------ I � �D o �W wee >06 DRAINcco ._ ...... aNga ,� FRONT VIEW REAR VIEW x�< SCALE: 1/4" = 1'-0" SCALE. 1/4" = 1'-0" \ \ / METAL RUCI IN; a U -e " F. cr Ey FLOOR PLAN L. SIDE VIEW AGC S'- ®. SCALE:1/2" 1-0" SCALE:1/4" 1'-0" "--AIR IN IAKL P_4LLIMINARY DRAWING NOT I`OR CONS IRUCI"ION STRUCTURE SPECIFICATIONS FOR STANDARD WRS VAULT EVAPORATORTM RESTROOM FACILITY SPECIAL PROVISIONS - BUILDING CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION Basic Considerations SAMPLE A. Furnishing a plant -fabricated restroom and foundation/vault, installed in accordance with this and other sections of these specifications. The structure must meet or exceed these specifications. B. The contractor/owner will furnish and install plant fabricated facility, Model #i!R2-167 WRS AC National Value Engineered Structures by Biological Mediation Systems, LLC., Ft. Collins, CO 80526,1-800-524-1097. C. The building and foundation/vault must be engineered and prefabricated, including building structure, foundation/vault, wiring, and other elements shown on the drawings. Building supplier must be registered/certified to build prefabricated buildings in the state in which they are manufactured. The building shall be factory constructed on a precast concrete slab. D. The building will be shrink wrapped for protection during transportation. During transportation if rain or snow is encountered the building may arrive dirty. Cleaning the building will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. The contractorlowner will be responsible for touch up painting and repairfrom screws and nails used to attach shrink wrap. Touch up paint will be provided. Site Preparation, Excavation and Fill A. Initial site preparation will be under the direction of the governing agency (owner), i.e., removal of existing lawns, shrubs, or dirt in the area of the building. B. All materials and design of walkways, ramps, railings, piers and/or footing columns will be provided by contractorlowner. C. The crane for off loading and setting the structure onsite will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. One hour will be allowed for off loading. Additional charges will be billed to the contractorlowner for delays. A spreader bar assembly will be required. The dimensions for the lifting points are outlined on a shop drawing. These must be reviewed by the crane company for clarification as to the requirements of the spreader bar assembly. Contractor/owner will provide a clear and safe access to the building site for the delivery truck. This includes narrow bridges, limited weight bridges, low overhead obstructions and all traffic control if needed. If access cannot be provided via delivery truck, the contractorlowner will take delivery at an alternate site and will be responsible for final transportation to the job site. The pick-up lifts for the building slab will be provided by BMS. A deposit will be required for the lifts. The deposit will be returned when the lifts are returned to BMS. Utility Book -Ups A. The main electrical supply, connection, meter and disconnect will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner. The main electrical supply can be brought through the exterior wall of the building, or as designated on the plans. Anchoring of the Restroom A. Anchoring the restroom to the foundation shall be per manufacturers drawings and specifications including weld plates between the floor slab and vault to be supplied by BMS and field installed bythe contractorlowner. BUILDING MATERIAL I CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATION A. The structure shall be National Value Engineered Structures, Model #R2-167 WRS AC by Biological Mediation Systems, LLC. B. The structure shall consist of two factory constructed units, the building and the vault. The vault shall be a water tight vault with a factory installed spray in two part 100% solid polyurethane chemical resistant liner. The vault shall be built by a precast company that is currently certified by the National Precast Concrete Association. All necessary connections between the building and foundation/vault will be the responsibility of the contractorlowner, C. The structure shall be designed under the direct supervision of a Professional Engineer licensed in the State of and all plans shall bear his seal. D. The owner will be responsible for all licenses, permits, taxes and approvals. I. Precast Concrete Floor System and FoundationNault A. Restroom floor: The floor shall be a one piece structural monolithic precast concrete slab manufactured in a closed environmentally controlled plant. Concrete to develop 5,000 psi in 28 days. The floor slab shall be designed and engineered with pick-up points for possible future relocation. The slab shall be 6" thick concrete with a 6" steel angle around the pick-up points of the slab. The floor finish shall have a non-skid broom finish. After the slab is cured, it will be sealed with a two-part epoxy coating. The minimum rebar size shall be #4 at 12" on center. Anchor bolts shall be 518" with 2 x 2 x 3/16 plate washers. The anchor bolts will be embedded in a minimum 4" of concrete. The walls will be installed directly on concrete. Installation of walls on ferrous (Steel) surfaces will not be permitted. Floor drains will be precast into the slab. B. Foundation shall be manufactured in a closed environmentally controlled plant. Construction shall be 6" thick concrete floor with 4" concrete walls. Concrete to develop 5,000 psi in 28 days. The floor slab shall be designed and engineered with pick-up points for possible future relocation. C. There will be four (4) weld plates cast into the top of the vault. 4" x'/" x 6". BMS will provide four (4) 2" x'/" x 6" weld plates that must be welded onsite by the contractor/owner. This will complete the connection between the floor slab and the foundation/vault. D. Bidders must have minimum 3 years experience in building these floor systems. The floor system shall be built by a precast company that is currently certified by the National Precast Concrete Association. II. Wood (Structural wood members to be S.Y.P., S.P.F., or Hem Fir) A. Wall Framing: Nominal 2 x 4 and 2 x 6 at nominal 16" on center. Walls shall be built in single piece sections for lamination of the FRP interior wall system. B. Roof Framing: Engineered trusses. C. Roof Sheathing: 15132 "CDX" plywood. III. Thermal and Moisture Protection A. Roofing Material: Shall be 26 ga. metal roofing with matching trim. Color to be chosen by owner from standard color chart (26 GA/Colorfast 45' Finish). It shall be installed over 30# roof underlayment per manufacturer's recommendations. B. Fascia: 26 gauge metal "J" trim, color to match metal roof. C. Soffit: 15132" ACX plywood, painted to match body color D. Drip Edge: 3" X 3" 26 gauge metal to match metal roof. E. Sealants: 100% silicone sealant & latex paintable caulk. F. Moisture Barrier: 30# felt G. Vents: Installed in gable ends 2 IV. Finishes A. Restroom Interior: BMS seamless vandal resistant sanitary wall system. Product shall be Kemlite®with Surfaseal®. Fiberglass reinforced plastic wall system, floor to ceiling, corner to corner void of molding and drive rivet fasteners. Will not mildew, rot or rust, Easy to clean, resistant to high moisture and corrosive environment, can be scrubbed or steam cleaned. Graffiti and scratch resistant, color white. 3132" thick, class A fire rated, pebble grain finish, fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP) laminated to ACX Plywood. B. Restroom Ceiling: Ceiling shall be fiberglass reinforced plastic (FRP). Color white. C. Interior Wall Corner: 1 %2" x 1'/," 930 stainless steel, fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. D. Base: 4" x IN' extruded aluminum 6063-T6, clear anodized finish, with eased top edge, fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. E. Exterior Siding: Hardi Panel®, cement fiber siding, Sierra pattern. 30 year -limited warranty, will not crack, rot, or burn. F. Paint and/or staining: Color to be chosen by owner. The contractor/owner will be responsible for on site touch up painting and filling of any holes from the shrink wrap. G. Corner & Base Trim: Hardi Trim®, color to be chosen by owner. 15 year limited warranty, will not crack, rot or burn. V. doors A. Material: Doors shall be 18 gauge steel, frames shall be16 gauge steel. Frames shall have a wrap around design to cover the exterior and interior wall. B. Hardware: All hardware shall meet ADA. 1. Closure: LCN146128 2. Deadbolts: Schlage B663 3. Door Lever: Schlage Rhodes D40S 4. Ives Heavy Duty Crash Stop 5. Hagar Hinges: ECBB100 6. Door Sweeps: MM1480A C. Windows: 12" x 48" 6" Acrylic block, 1 %" thick, Glacier Wave, White vinyl frame. D. Wall Vents: Powder Coated Aluminum. 14" x 16" through the wall intake vent with interior frame and bird and bug screen. VI. Plumbing A. Fixtures: H18 fiberglass toilet. VII. Electrical A. EMT or MC cable throughout. B. Underground Sleeve. Schedule 40 grey PVC, by contractor/owner. C. Panel: Siemens 100amp, with main. (or equal) 120/240 single phase. D. Chase Outlet: Leviton 20amp GFI. E. Restroom Lights: CVD232EL with T815 watt LED Lamps, polycarbonate lense, and 16 gauge cold rolled steel with corrosion resistant white baked enamel finish. 3 F. Exterior Lights: RAB WPLED with 13 watt LED Lamps. Fully shielded, full cutoff wall pack. Full cutoff optics with flat tempered glass lens. The bulbs and covers will need to be field installed by contractor/owner. G. Chase Light(s): RAB VX100DG with 11 watt LED Lamp, vapor tight globe and metal guard, switched. H. Light Timers: Model ST01 C by Intermatic, Vllll. Specialties A. 18" Grab Bar: 1'/2" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. B. 36" Grab Bar: 11/" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. C. 42" Grab Bar: 1t/2" diameter stainless steel with concealed fasteners. D. Toilet paper holders: BMS Model D-H2,1/" thick stainless steel, exposed roll type with locking device and fastened to wall with stainless steel vandal resistant screws. Owner to supply pad lock. E. Hand Sanitizers: Stoko Spray Instant Hand Sanitizer. IX. Waste Reduction System The system shall be Model W RS Vault EvaporatorTm (patent #5,573,661). The W RS system shall include the evaporator unit, vent pipe, roof curb and factory installed spray in 2 part 100% solid polyurethane chemical resistant liner. The contractor/owner will be responsible for 8" PVC connections from the vault evaporator to the vent fan, this will include the installation of the roof curb extension and the vent fan. Approved Equals The (AGENCY) shall determine all approved equals. In order to be considered an approved equal the following criteria must be met: 1. Manufacturers Literature: Submit complete manufacturers' literature and technical data. 2. Certification: Submit, via transmittal, properly identified with project name, location and date, certification of manufacturers compliance with the requirements specified herein signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of 3. Submit a complete set of construction drawings signed and sealed by a Professional Engineer registered in the State of 4. Submit (2) two, twelve -inch, samples and specification sheets on the following items; basement materials, roof decking, laminated beams, fascia, interior finish, and exterior siding. Note: Materials must meet specifications. 5. Provide (3) three location and contacts of similar buildings of this nature, built within the last six months. 6. All equals must be approved (10) ten days before the bid date. 7. All approved equals shall be notified with written statements of their approval. Manufacturers shall not bid this project without this written notification. Product Insurance 1. Manufacturer to provide minimum $2,000,000 PRODUCT/COMPLETED OPERATIONS coverage. 2. Carrier providing the coverage is rated BEST'S rating A or higher. 3. PRODUCTICOMPLETED OPERATIONS is an "occurrence" form basis. 0 4. Insurance certificate stating insurance coverage and compliance with the above requirements shall be submitted. 07/18/17 5 All Rights Reserved 23--0" J �� S'_0" 11 2 FRP TO FRP FRP TO FRF' Kelsie Sasabe From: veronica wagner <veronica@bmsprefab.com> Sent: Monday, April 13, 2020 5:36 AM To: Kelsie Sasabe Subject: RE: Prefabricated Public Restrooms - Request for Information Hi Kelsie, We no longer offer the DEVAP system. The unisex facility would run about $60,000.00 and the two hole facility would run about $100,000.00 without freight and depending on what aesthetics you are looking for. I am looking into what BMS needs to do about building in Hawaii as we have never done projects there. Let me know if you have any questions. Thank you Veronica Wagner Project Coordinator I Biological Mediation Systems, LLC T: 800.524.1097 1 C: 970.290.9368 veronica@bmsprefab.com Visit us online: Facebook I Twitter I Instagram I YouTube I Linkedln BMS11111 Biological Mediation Systems, LLC Proprietary Information and Liability Notices This e-mail and any attached documents may contain confidential or proprietary information. If you are not the intended recipient, please advise the sender immediately and delete this e-mail and all attached documents from your computer system. Any unauthorized disclosure, distribution or copying hereof is prohibited. From: Kelsie Sasabe <ksasabe@bowengineering.com> Sent: Friday, April 10, 2020 12:17 PM To: veronica wagner <veronica@bmsprefab.com> Cc: William Bow <WBow@bowengineering.com>; Emi Tanitomi <etanitomi@bowengineering.com> Subject: FW: Prefabricated Public Restrooms - Request for Information Hi Veronica, Thanks again for returning my call earlier. Bow Engineering is working on a feasibility study for a comfort station at Milolii Beach Park out on the Big Island of Hawaii. The existing facility has a total of 4 toilets and 2 sinks and is currently connected to a septic system. As a part of the report, we are looking at various options to present to the County as the location is more remote and we are not able to connect to a main sewer system. As I mentioned on the phone, my coworker was in communication with Glenn a couple of years ago (see emails below) for a similar feasibility study. I was wondering if you could provide an updated cost for the WRS and DEVAP models similar to what was provided below? Any updated information would be greatly appreciated. Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks! Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 5 ANUA BIOCOIR COCONUT FIBER BIOFILTER Feasibility Study Page 99 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park o w. modular system for residential and applications. BioCoir is prepackaged in >ing featuring natural media. BioCoir msitive watersheds through removal and other constituents. OANUA BioCoir BioCoir utilizes coconut fiber (coir) media housed in an engineered pod. Coir are the fibers that constitute the thick mesocarp, or husk, of the coconut fruit. Coconut fiber is low-cost and a renewable resource. The short -to -medium length fibers are a lingo cellulosic material and by-product of coconut harvesting in many developing nations. The high lignin content of these fibers results in a durable material. Pretreated effluent is sprayed over the media using specially designed helical spray nozzles that provide uniform distribution over the entire surface area within the pod. Treated effluent is recirculated through the media multiple times, which optimizes treatment. Why Choose BioCoir? o Produces high quality effluent o Certified to NSF/ANSI Standards 40 and 3rd party nitrogen reduction >50% o Proven results for over 15 years o Spray nozzles maximize effluent distribution over coir media surface o Simple to use and suitable for wide range of applications o Prepackaged, lightweight pod for easy installation 0 80%/20% split pods simplify design and installation o No gravity recirculation valve needed o Natural media: Allows free air flow and water movement Applications - Provides large, open surface area - Renewable and sustainable Residential - Low cost and easy to ship Commercial or community Intermittent or seasonal use Space constrained sites All climate conditions Nitrogen sensitive areas Only pods bearing the NSF° mark are OANUA certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 40, Class I BioCoir @ Coconut Fiber Biofilter Collection Sewage flows from the home or facility into a watertight primary tank or chamber. The solids settle and the liquid effluent flows by gravity through an effluent filter to the system. 2. Treatment The BioCoir Recirculating Media Filter provides biochemical treatment through passive biof ltration principles. The coconut fiber (coir) is uniform and provides ample surface area for biological growth. The media contains many voids to accommodate optimum air flow Treatment Performance and water flow. Pretreated effluent is sprayed over the coconut fiber media using specially designed helical spray nozzles that provides even distribution Parameters Typical Values over the entire surface area within the pod. Treated effluent is recirculated BOD5 <_10 to <_30 mg/I multiple times which optimizes treatment. TSS <_10 to <_30 mg/I ::, Dispersal Total Nitrogen <_20 mg/I The highly treated effluent exits the 20% side of the pod and flows into a gravity drainfield or into a pump chamber for dosing -PP, drip irrigation, or other pressurized drainfields. Control Panel 1.25" Pressure Inlet Line 1' c lklllllr 4" Line Grommet 20%Flow to Drainfield or Float Tree Pump Chamber Filtered Pump Vault Dosing Pump OANUA NS Models ATS-NS500-BC-N 500 ATS-NS750-BC-N 660 ATS-NS1000-BC-N 800 ATS-NS500-80/20-BC-N 500 ATS-NS750-80/20-BC-N 660 ATS-NS1000-80/20-BC-N 800 ATS-NS500-2-80/20-BC-N 1000 ATS-NS500-3-80/20-BC-N 1500 ATS-NS750-2-80/20-BC-N 1320 )00 OANUA 50 Pre -assembled Pod Flexible configurations Multiple sizes available Lightweight pods Synthetic media Unique 80%/20% effluent splitting No gravity recirculation valve needed Only pods bearing the NSFO mark are certified to NSF/ANSI Standard 40,Class I 4 'ANUA MILOLI'I BEACH PARK IWS IMPROVEMENTS BIG ISLAND, HI uan�cs 80% RETURN BIOCOIR NS-1000 p0% FORWARD GRAVITY FLOW FROM FACILITY 80120 PODS (3) A C • Z m EXISTING EXISTING PRIMARY IM 1530 DOSING �-. EXISTING TANK (1250 GAL) TANK O • �------ DISPERSAL BED � � DISTRIBUTION BOX NOTE: VERIFY TANK WATERTIGHTNESS AND PROPER ORIENTATION e 4" GRAVITY BYPASS LINE LEGEND .TIMED DOSE BIOCOIR PUMP .NITY BASIN INFLUENT: HYDRAULIC-1,250 GPD AVERAGE; 2,500 GPD PEAK ORGANIC-200 MG/L BOD; 200 MG/L TSS Kelsie Sasabe From: Mike Fugate <mike.fugate@anuainternational.com> Sent: Wednesday, April 8, 2020 2:49 PM To: Kelsie Sasabe; William Bow; Emi Tanitomi Subject: Re: Miloli'i IWS improvements Attachments: Anua_CWC_Schematic_Biocoir_1250_Avg_2500_Peak_H I_Milolii_040120.pdf Hi Kelsie, Finally.... sorry for the couple extra days. Shipping estimates ended up being a huge challenge. Attached is the flow diagram I promised. Basically we didn't add much pretreatment tankage.... just the 1500 gallon tank (labeled I 1530) which also serves as a dosing tank. The three Biocoir (coconut husk) pods are adequately sized for the peak flows you are concerned about. So the operation is set up to return 80% of the flow from the pods back to the dosing tank for recirculation so that once it gets to the field, it's been through multiple stages of treatment. As total capacity in the pretreatment tanks is marginal here, we suggest a high water gravity bypass line that will skip the Biocoir pods and run straight to the field. I don't expect the situation to occur often but it's cheap insurance against a short lived hydraulic overload. Lastly, we propose an alkalinity basin on the recirculation line as we anticipate the wastestream from the bathrooms to be high in ammonia. The basin media will restore proper pH levels to the stream so optimal biological treatment can occur. It appears that available area is a premium at the site so for reference the footprint of the 1500 gallon tank is about 5' x 15' and that of each Biocoir pod is 5' x 11'. I decided not to follow through with the Puraflo peat biofilter option because (1) it would require many more containers thus more footprint than Biocoir and (2) the shipping costs simply made it impractical. Shipping costs would've been significantly more than the equipment itself with this option. Total project equipment cost (equipment + oversight) is $21,649.84. This includes the dosing tank and the entire pumping package, the preassembled Biocoir pods, and the alkalinity basin. Like I mentioned above, finding affordable shipping was a great challenge. The best shipping cost we could attain is $13,380.00. Please let me know your thoughts Kelsie. I'll be glad to answer any additional questions from your team as well. Thanks, Mike On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 8:50 PM Kelsie Sasabe <ksasabe@bowengineering.com> wrote: Hi Mike, It was nice talking with you too! And no problem, next week is fine. Thanks again and have a good weekend too! Design Engineer Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 6 BIOBARRIER HIGH STRENGTH MEMBRANE BIOREACTOR (HSMBR) Feasibility Study Page 106 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park Innovation through three companies, BibMicrobics, SeptiTech, and Sciar FAST. At the forefront of sustainable design and with more than 80,000 installed systems in over 80 countries, these systems meet the highest performance standards for Btu Barrier. Single -Family 8 Residential Systems The B- B f MBR - N A 40 (cla 1) 245 f 350 /o W R (h d srncN ) II EN125663 'f' tl perov ae pair protects In med a with new oppo naies/cr waterrrecy g BIG Barrier Bia!:BarrierNS Small 8 Large Commercial Systems These advanced Membrane Sma. ctor (MBR) ana High-atreegib Membrane Biereactor (HS—) ritems are designed ealyo-eatanmewesrewararlblaurwatar apndcgreywgenerated from small to larger pmpeM ppl ppl awns that far exceed effluent Biq"Ba ier own, MuIti-Family & Community Systems There are a let of factors, from the type of w er generatetl to the amount of /low expected and 9eogr—d- terrain sltuetlons e taken in - - HrSMBR' systems tend be applied toalarg olficebuildings,wmeries and /ood processingg raaedea, amens other emerpriae:. dealin with the treatment of water — where infrastructure 2 _ BioMicrobics has developed a number of innovative prdtlucts g wi and O drainage are not available. Our systems are designed and j engineered with sustainability and user practicality in mind. 'I m O 2 m w H D O„ O 13 B1 —t U MEMBRANE 81OREACTOR AWARD -WINNING INTEGRATED WATER 3 BETTER WATER. BETTE4 �.IyI��J` 1L7N14JIW haJr1 lraW 10 wuJ141 W"AW." �``������,��,V a*+u�+mSl-.•v...�J �v�agµa ��\\��``,' +�A1�AilA71�111�.� 4iIJALi ff NE BIOREACTOR The rise in demand for sustainable technologies to the world's water needs, green -building incentives, changes in regulations, water shortages, and the rising cost of water have all become principal drivers towards sustainable solutions. MBR module systems replace the traditional clarifier, sand filler and disinfection processes used in most conventional wastewater treatment processes by removing the total suspended solids with OF/MF (ultrafltration/ microfiltration) membranes. While conventional treatment processes focus on the degradation of the waste and nutrients (i.e. Nitrogen and Phosphorous), the membranes physically separate much smaller microorganisms and contaminants that create turbidity. The membrane modules are submerged in a biological tank or side streams tank, with the water being drawn through the membranes under vacuum, leaving the suspended biomass material in the biological aeration tank. The MBR systems produce consistent effluent quality even in varying influent Engineered to fit most residential (small to large) and commercial applications, the BioBarrier treats the water to 99.9% clean of contaminants. These pre-engineered, package plants utilizing the MBR technology will achieve better treatment and is by far the most effective for removing pollutants from the wastewater. BioBanieP HSMBR® (High Strength Membrane BloReactors) larger ii—er.i.1 (restaurants, hotelslresolts wineries, breweries, and other ape .tyapplinr,ns)systern t achievehigherwaterquality standards. BioBarr r" GWMBR"" (Grey -Water Only) treatment and reuse for greywaler sources (Le. sinks, showers, washing machines, and other non-blackwater seamed) BioBanieP° MariniiMBR-" deal for total blackwaterlgreywater sources and water reuse onboard boats, ships, workboats, yachts, terries, and NOW IT WORKS! QIn the primary wiling zone, a S—TEE"'devices, .sad to prevent largo ..M. from entering the trail —A zone. © A remote, aboveground blower iMroduaes air (oxygen) Into the trail —at module to facilitate a robust circulation and aeration of wastewater. © Onaa inside the treatment tank, suspentled treatment occurs. Optional LD(M System can be used for extra aeration for higher than normal SOD concentrations. 0 Immer,,d in the treatment tank, the BioBarn,W module(,) and air grid(,) create an upward flow between membrane plates providing vlgorcus scouring action. Q Water pa,sas through the membranes far microfiltration and uurafiltretion processes. 0 Clear, od.n. s, treated water exits the system. C • • UNIT MAXIMUM TREATMENT CAPACITY* P. „•.,ri.^ � ses 0 5 1 NI 500 GPD 1LID) 1 - 8 1 - IIIolss: soaln"ale rmncwaimr, xxas,��t°a� d. mssaz, 1. N 1 PD 411100 LPD 1 - 1 1 - 2 0111111iI. E12 f5500 LPD 6 24 I 0-30 Note: MBR medusa capacities are best rated based on biological oxygen demand (BOD), hydraulic and other project -specific considerations. Actual capacity may vary with local conditions and performance goals. UNIT MAXIMUM TREATMENT CAPACITY* ® ^i clDl Consulr Fanory }11) Consulr Fanory ® 3 0 f Nl 3000 GPD (11.3 ma[Df Consulr Fanory HSMBir 1.5 f N) 1500 GPD (5.5 ma/DI Consulr Fanor, XSMBR° s o (m soon GPD (11.s ma/D) Connllr Fanory XSMBR° a 5 fNl 4500 GPD (17 ma/DI Consult Fader, XSMBR°' 6.0 f Nl 600o GPD 122 7 mi/DI Consulr Fanory XSMBRe 9.0 M 9000 GPD (34 ma/Dl Consvlr Fanory For additi.n.1 flows larger than 9000 GPD [Mm'ID] or unusual applications requiring other treatment levels, please consult factory 'Treatment capeoiry: As a "gwdellme' for soggeated use, Ina imdlvlduel Mae rated b a (SOD), hydreolle a olber project- p gn�slde� s. omlye1resmemlel m rength appllcatlons may be deslg^ed es toles number of people rapacilym y nth feral eg emamts, rommhoma ama PatInfluenl EflU., For the inNal (­p) mixed liquor suspended Ft — _pd 4 � < 455 solids (MLSS) ca cen ion d me system was I— BM nt_ 1. -'fill <5 than 300 mgh, the MLSS --it. allowed I FII <j building up to as high as 12 000 mg/L. be/ore fhe COD. m I. 48u 16 sludge was wasted fmm the sysram. If taoa abom TXN, In L 61... 1.4 eighth) months berme ,cadge wasrrng was mgsired Tonal Nivo en, mL 61 5.5 NHr. m¢L 4.2 OS Neady 95% of the sludge was wasted, Li yid Te erantre. eC 7 - 31 8 - 31 the remaining 5% of solids was used as Vo.o sin Operation 375 375 microbial seed for the biological process. San1TEEe 818-B Blower Shutoff Housing Valve o � A �Sw l�l n 6�sv Distribution Box See note 1 1 — Settling Zone Volume 0.5-1 Operating Water Level [1681 66 Trentment 7one � Cnntrol ParTe NOTES 1 . Blower piping to BloBorrier0 HSMBRO may not exceed 40 FT [12 m] total length or-c use 4 elbows maximum per train. For distances grec'er then 40 F [12 m] -consult factory. Blowers must be located above flood/standing water levels on concrete bases 42" X 28" X2" [105 X 70 X 5cm] minimum. 2. Run vent(s) to desired location above finish grade and cover opening(s) with vent grateisl w/at least a total of 8 sq in. [53 sq. cm] of total open surface area. Secure with stainless steel screws. Vent piping must not allow excess moisture build up or back pressure. 3. All appurtenances to BioBarriea (e.g. tank pump outs, etc.) must conform to all country, state, province, and local plimbing and electrical codes. 4. The BIGBclrrier'O HSMBR® control systems are provided by Bio-Microbics, Inc. 5. The primary compartments may be a separate tank. 6. The baffle separating the settling and the treatment chambers shall be sealed to the top of the tank, as shown on the drawing. Ventilation for the settling zone shall be provided for in the same manner as a traditional septic tank. 7. All inspection, viewing, access, and pump out ports must be secured, to prevent accidental or unauthorized access. 8. Tank, anchors, piping, conduit, blower housing pads and vents are provided by others. 4. All piping and ancillary equipment installed after BbBarner`R' HSMBRO, must not impede or restrict filtrate pump. 10. BbBorrier,R HSMBRO assemblies must be secured to the tanks to prevent movement or floatation(see Installation Instructions for details). 11. Distribution box must balance flow to both trains. 12. Filtrate pump vault must remain dry. Vacuum Gauge Treated Effluent Filtrate Pump -wcy Pump Base by Valve others see note 12 Maximum Water Level [203] SECTION 80 DO NOT SCALE UNLESS NOTED DIMENSIONS ARC IN INCCHFS [CENIIMEIth'S] TOLERANCES IN/ IN A -A± :_sCMAc"9 ] THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF 810-MICROSICS INC. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT 1HE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BIO-MICROBICS INC. IS PROHIBITED. DESIGN AND INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE BIO-MICROBIC$ C 20 6 INTEREST OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT, ALL PRODUCTS ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE wIrHOUT NOTICE. • IIETTER WATER. BETTER WORLD. HSMBR 1.5 oanww� Ivumaee HSMBROI.5-d SHEtl I OF 6 Settling Zone Panel Volume 0.5-1 Treatment Zone a times daily flowBlower m Housing Operating Water Level [168] SECTION l 1. Blower piping to BioBarrier0 HSMBRO may not exceed 40 FT [ 12 m] total length and use 4 elbows maximum per train. For distances greater than 40 FT `12 m] - consult factory. Blowers must be located above flood/standing water levels on concrete bases 42" X 28" X2' [105 X 70 X 5cm] minimum. 2. Run vent(s) to desired location above finish grade and cover openings) with vent grates) w/at least 8 sq in. [53 sq, cm] of total open surface area. Secure with stainless steel screws. Vent piping must not allow excess (moisture build up or back pressure. 3. All appurtenances to BioBorrier@ (e.g. tank pump outs etc.) must conform to all country, state, province, and local plumbing and electrical codes. 4. The BioBorrierO HSMBRS control systems are provided by Bio-Microbics, Inc. 5. The primary compartments may be a separate tank. 6. The baffle separating the settling and the treatment chambers shall be sealed to the top of the tank, as shown on the drawing, Ventilation for the settling zone shall be provided for in the some manner as a traditional septic tank. 7. All inspection, viewing, access, and pump out ports must be secured, to prevent accidental or unauthoCaed access. 8. Tank, anchors, piping, conduit, blower housing pads and vents are provided by others. 9. All piping and ancillary equipment installed after BoBarrier�ft�) HSMBRO , must not impede or restrict filtrate pump. 10. BlcearrierDR HSMBRO assemblies must be secured to the tanks to prevent movement or floatation{see Installation Instructions for details). 11. Filtrate pump vault must remain dry. 1-Way Valve DO NOT SCALE UNLESS NOTED Maximum Water Level DIMENSIONS ARC IN IN C:HLS [203 MAX] [CENIIMFIEI'S] 80 MAX TOLERANCES ±pc,;, iv/IN [± CS CMICA',] THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF 810-MICROSICS INC. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT 1HE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BIO-MICROBICS INC. IS PROHIBITED. DESIGN AND INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE BID-MICROBICS C 20 6 INTEREST OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT, ALL PRODUCTS ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE wFTHOuT NOTICE. Vacuum Gauge —Treated Effluent —Filtrate Pump —Pump Base by others see note 1 1 @ETTER WATER. BETTER WORLD. HSMBR 1.5 oanww� Ivumaee H2SMBI 1.5-S OF 16 Settling Zone Volume 0.5-1 times dauly flow i L E I I I I -- I I I E-- Operating Water Level [ 168 ] 66 I I E Treatment Zone [46 MIN] 018 MIN SaniTEE Access I I I [244 MIN] 96 MIN I I I Maximum Water Level [203] 80 I I ' I ' L------------------------------------J [71] 028 HSMBR Access THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF 810-MICROSICS INC. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT 1HE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BIC-MICROBICS INC. IS PROHIBITED. DESIGN AND INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE Bpp-MICROBVCS C 20 6 INTEREST OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT, ALL PRODUCTS ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE wITHOUT NOTICE. [11] 0 4.5 IN] N SECTION E-E SCALE 1 : 50 NOTES: Consult factory for tank volume sizing. DO NOT SCALE UNLESS NOTED DIMENSIONS ARC IN INCHFS ICEN I IMF IEh's1 TOLERANCES BETTER WATER. BETTER WORLD. t 0 C,'? IN/IN I±;'scMlc:A�,1 HSMBR 1.5 A lank Details HSMBR 1.5A) 3OF 6 'nENIEEDIJIA/.M I REV_ INIG5-B Settling Zone Volume 0.5-1 times daily flow Jl Operating Water Level [168] Treatment Zone [244 MIN] 96 MIN Maximum Water Level [203] 80 r----------------- 1 T-------------------------------------, E46 MIN] I I 018MIN SaniTEE Access I I I I I I I I F I I I I I -----------------rI L------------------------------------- [91] 036 HSMBR Access THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF BIO-MICROSICS INC. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT 1HE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BIO-MICROBICS INC. IS PROHIBITED. DESIGN AND INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE Bi0—MICROBVCS C 20 6 INTEREST OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT, ALL PRODUCTS ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE wFTHOuT NOTICE. I IN] V SECTION H-H SCALE 1 : 50 NOTES: Consult factory for tank volume sizing. DO NOT SCALE UNLESS NOTED DIMENSIONS ARC IN INC:HFS [CEN I IMF IEh'S1 TOLERANCES BETTER WATER. BETTER WORLD. ±0 C,'? IN/IN [±Q:`scMlc:9',1 HSMBR 1.5 A lank retails HSMBR 1.5-S SHEII 4OF6 J-- A I Rev_ INI-05-B Supplemental Air see note 4,5, & 6 Notes: 1. Filtrate Pump must be secured in a dry vault and not be exposed to freezing temperatures. 2. Float stand should be located away from the MBR modules within the treatment zone to prevent float chatter. 3. Utilize SS lifting cable to remove the MBR module. 4. Supplemental aeration with LIXORO will be required for wastewater with higher than 300mg/L BOD. 5. See LIXORO Drawings for more details. 6. Provide additional ventilation as required per LIXOR specifications. independent float stand supplied by others— I ! [23] [203] t 9 80 [1681 Maximum 66 Water Level n Operating I Water Level THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF 810-MICROSICS INC. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT 1HE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF BIO-MICROBICS INC. IS PROHIBITED. DESIGN AND INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE Bi0-MICRQBICS C 206 INTEREST OF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT, ALL PRODUCTS ARE SUBJECT TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. DO NOT SCALE UNLESS NOTED DIMENSIONS ARC IN INC:HFS [CENIIMEIth'S] TOLERANCES ±p(;, IN/IN [± r,MIc:A,l PETTIR WATER. BETTER WORLD. HSMBR 1.5 oanww� Ivumaee HSMBRQ Details SHELI 50F6 Specifications for BioBc ier0 HSMBRG 1.5 Wastewaier Treatment System ].GENERAL The contractor shall furnish and install (1) BioBorrier@ HSMBR* 1 .5 treatment system as manufactured by Bio-Microbics, Inc. The treatment system shall be complete with all needed equipment as shown on the drawings and specified herein. The principal items of equipment supplied by Bio-Microbics, Inc. shall include BioBarrii HSMBR@ assemblies, all controls, filtrate pumps, air blower assemblies, and SanITl BI8 B pre-screen devices. All other hems will be provided by others. The Bio8ar ierO HSMBR 1.5-D system shall be instaned in two (2) Identical treatment trains. Loch treatment train shall include one (1) BioBorrlerb assemblies situated within a two -compartment tank with a minimum wall height of 8 feel_ the BioBorrieii HSMBR 1 _b-S system sholl he installed in ono hootment train. The ireatment train shall include two {21 BloBarricIr0' assemblies situated within a two -compartment ionkwith a minimum wall height cf 8 fact. Suggested maximum settling zone IS {1) x the daily flow. Tank(s) must provide adequate pump out access and canfoun to local, state, and all other applicable codes. The contractor shall provide coordination with tank supplier with regards to fabrication of the tank, installation of the BioBarrier@ unil and delivery to the job site. 2. OPERATING CONDITIONS The 13iuBwlfer0 HSMBIzO 1.5 treulnlenl system shell be cupuble of treuting up lu I,500 gpd wuslewuier Tram all fuuililies producing upprupriute waste to develup urld susluin a viuble biomass. Waste conlaininq inhibitory substances for the biological processes or membrane filtration operation is not recommended for treatment in the BioBarrie* HSMBRG system, Consult factory for proper sizing and usage. 3. MEMBRANE The membrane is a combination of ultrofiltration and microtiltration using PvdF and PES cost material. The membrane sheet is supported by HDPE or ABS and laser welded to the plate. The BioBarrier(S HSMBRO membrane module shall consist all sheet membranes arranged in a cartridge which is aerated via subhousing air grid. The BioBarrier@ HSMBR@ membrane assembly shall be fixed in pos'i ion and shall use noncorrosive parts. Each membrane system shall be designed and installed to ensure that adequate turbulence is provided by the aeration system to insure easy movement of MLSS within the membrane system. 4. BLOWERS The BioBarrier@ HSMBR® 1.5-D system shall come equipped with two (2) blowers each capable of delivering 10 - 15 CFM [17-25 m3/hr). The blower assemblies shall include an inlet filter with metal filler element. The Bid Barrier® HSMBRO 1.5-S system shall come equipped with a blower capable of delivering 20 - 30 CFM [35-50 m3lhr]. The blower assemblies shall include an inlet filter wish metal filter element. Blowers shall be mounted, up 10 40 feel [1' 2 meters] maximum, and no more than 4 elbows from the BioBarrier@ HSMBR@ assembly on a contractor supplied concrete base. Blowers must not set in standing water and their elevation must be higher than the normal flood level. A two-piece, rectangular housing shall be provided for each blower. The discharge air line tram each blower to the BoBarrierb HSMBRG assembly shall be provided and installed by the contractor. �,. LIITRAIF PUMP Pumps shall be mounted, up to 20 feet (6 metersl maximum from the BioBarrier@ HSMBRG tank in a contractor supplied pump chamber. Pumps must not set in standing water and their elevation must be higher than normal flood level. The suction and discharge lines as well as the vacuum gauge and the one-way valve for each pump shall be provided and installed by the contractor. The filtrate pump is not intended cis dosing pump for final disposal of the effluent. 6_ ELECIRICAL The electrical source should be within T50 feet [45.7 meters] of the blower consult local codes for Iongerwiring distances. All wiring must conform to all applicable codes (EC, NEC, etc.). Wiring distances must prevent significant voltage loss. Input power on 60Hz electrical system is three phase, 208-230 VAC, maximum 20 Amps. Input power on 50Hz electrical system is three phase, 208- 23D VAC, maximum 20 Amps. All conduit and wiring shall be supplied by contractor. 7. CONTROLS The BioBarricii HSMBRG 1.5-D system shall come equipped with two (2) control panels. The BioBorrier@ HSMBR@ 1.5-S system shall come equipped with one (1) control panel. Each control panel I. power to the blower, the fihraie pump, and the water level floats with visual and audible alarms capable of signaling blower circuit failure and high water conditions. The control panel is equipped with SFl (Secuencinq Fixed Reactor) timed Control feature. A manual silence button is included. S, INSTALLATION AND OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS All installation and connections work of the BioBarrier@ HSMBR@ 1.5 shall be done in accordance with the written instructions provided by the manufacturer and in accordance with all opplic:nble local codes and regulations. Operations manuals shall be furnished which will include a descrip!ion of installation, operation, and system maintenance procedures. V. FLOW AND DOSING BdBarril HSMBR@ systems have been successfullly designed, tested and certified receiving gravity, dernr'iT-d based influent flow. when influent flow is controlled by pump or other means to help with highly variable flow conditions, then multiple dosing events should be used to help ensure even I ovw. I O.WARRANTY Bio-Microbics, Inc. walrronts all new High Strength BioBarril models (NoBarrier* HSMBR* 1.5 , 3.0, 4.5, 6.0, and 9.0) a ainst defects in materials and workmanship for a period of one year after installation or 18 months from date of shipment which ever occurs first, subject 10 the following terms and conditions, all other B1oBarrier@ system models are warranted for a period of two years after installation or three years from date of shipment, whichever occurs first, subject to the following terms and conditions): During the warranty period, if any part is detective or fails to perform as specified when operating of design conditions, and if the equipment has been installed and is being operated and maintained in accordance with the written instructions provided by Bio-Microbics, Inc., Bio-Microbics, Inc. will repair or replace at its discretion such detective parts free of charge. Defective parts must be returned by owner to Bio-Microbics, Inc.'s factory postage pold, if so requested. The cost of labor and all other expenses resulting from replacement of the defective parts and from installation of parts furnished under this warranty and regular maintenance items such as filters or bulbs shall be borne by the owner. This warranty does not cover general syslern misuse, aerator components which have been damaged by flooding or any Components Thal have been, disassembled by unauthorized persons, improperly installed or domaged due to altered or Improper DC NOT SCALE wirmq or oveiload prpfectlon_ Thisworionty applies only to the treatment plant and does not include any of the structure wiring, UNLESS NOTED plumbing, drainage, septic tank or disposed system, Bio-Microbics, Inc. is reserves the right to revise, change or modify the conshuction ai design if the BioBgrrlerC HSMBRG system, or any component part or parts thereat, without incurring any DIMENSIONS ARf IN w1:HLs obfigolion to make such changes or modifications In present equipment, Bro-MicroblCs. Inc. Is not responsible for consequential [CF IN INCHIF, ] or incidental damages of any nature resulting from such things as, but not limited to, defect in design, material, or workmansh ip, RBETTER WATER BETTER woRLD. ays or delIn delivery, replacements or Iepoi[5 TOLERANCES _ ( NC +l-S6R 1-5 ,.... °C U,',JITI-T C A -C= - 1:L,NFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DR`," H-SOLE FRG- ':'..;,Y,I'LROBICSINC. ANY REPRnDUCTIONIN A Sptf ciflcaTIOnS I IMBR SHEET -, FC.E WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION C- BI:? s ?OBICS ,'�- 3 ED. DESIGN pN❑ INVENTION RIGHTS ARE RESERVED. IN THE BIG -MICROBIC$ C 201 6 1.5 6 OF 6 INTtRESTOF TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCEMENT. ALL PRODUCT_ . -T_ TO DESIGN AND OR MATERIAL CHANGE WITHOUT NOTICE. .�• �Ia. m n r `m;e I_t=uHNULOc-,lES 1314 South King Street, Suite 1051 Honolulu. Hawaii 96814 Project: Wastewater Treatment Options for Milolii Beach Park Prepared for: Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. DATE: 5/13/2020 PROPOSAL: 20705 Thank you for your interest in Fluid Technologies and the opportunity to provide you a proposal for the products and services requested. ITEM QTY DESCRIPTION A 2 BioBarrier HSMBR 1.5 B 2 Non -Traffic Rated Tank, 2000 gallon C 2 UV Disinfection System D 1 Excavation/Construction: mobilize, excavate, install tanks, piping, conduits E 1 Installation of BioBarrier systems and Mission RTU F 1 Mission RTU, includes one year service package and installation G 1 O&M Service (1 year): Sludge pump out H 1 Freight TOTAL Thank you for your consideration. COST EXT. COST $20,500.00 $41,000.00 $8,025.00 $16,050.00 $2,000.00 $4,000.00 $36,250.00 $36,250.00 $18,750.00 $18,750.00 $6,250.00 $6,250.00 $2,500.00 $2,500.00 $3,000.00 $3,000.00 $127, 800.00 Respectfully, Jan Reyes 5/13/2020 (808)621-6684 1 Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 4 * ATTACHMENT 7 NAYADIC WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM Feasibility Study Page 116 of 124 Miloli`i Beach Park TREATMENT SYSTEMS Proud Manufacturers Of: I F .,w , . Environmental SAUD HY01811IN Im A COMPLETE TREATMENT SYSTEM IN A SINGLE EXCAVATION Consolidated Treatment Systems, Inc. is proud to present the Nayadic° wastewater treatment system. With over 35 years of proven performance, the Nayadic°is the Installer's choice for residential and commercial onsite wastewater treatment. Designed specifically for installers, the Nayadic° is lightweight, compact, easy to transport, and even easier to install. The system's conical shape requires less excavation than traditional systems which reduces time onsite when digging in rocky soils or areas with high ground water. The compact design is perfect for tight lots" and the fiberglass construction eliminates the need for expensive cranes or boom trucks to set the unit. The system's design is based on the same time tested engineering principles found in today's municipal systems. The Nayadic° has been certified under ANSIINSF Standard 40 protocol as a class 1 system and removes more than 95% of wastewater contaminants. Every system comes complete with tank, audible 1 visual alarm, external compressor and hardware. Units also include a two year manufacturer's warranty. For more information please visit us on the web at www.consolidatedtreatment.com or call toll free 1-800-503-0163. N AYA D I C" WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS PATENT PENDING EASILY ACCEPTS STANDARD 24" R15ER SECTIONS 3 DISCHARGE OPTIONS 5IMPLIFIE5 DRAIN FIELD CONNECTION JIG DRILLED COVER EASILY ALIGNS AND INCLUDES 3 LIFTING EYE5 WHICH ALSO PROVIDE ANCHOR POINTS FOR UPLIFT RESTRAINTS NOTE: ENTIRE 5Y5TEM CAN 13E � I FIELD A55EMBLED IN UNDER 5 MINUTES 3 el MULTIPLE AERATION P OPTIONS AVAILABLE U W CSC tS� W N � ENGINEERED FLANGE Z SEALS WATERTIGHT W z I TO PREVENT INFILTRATION � AND EXFILTRATION W W Lz r DURABLE FIBERGLASS U� mo CONSTRUCTION (3/1 F" NOMINAL) r\ Q a Q HOLDS UP TO THE. TOUGHEST 51TE CONDITIONS Q w z * AL OMPONENTS NEST ALL FOP, A Y E O E S <C Q Z � � TRANSPORT & FREIGHT SAVINGS � Model M-6A Capacity: • 600 Gal. Holding • 500 Gal. Treated Specifications: Apx. 485 lbs. Aeration Rates: 3000 cf/lb. BOD/day at 3 psig Compressor: 1/4 hp, 1725 rpm, 60 cycle, 115V Rated Capacity: 2to3.7cfm —upto5psig KW0.19 Diffuser: Disc Plate, Diaphragm type Organic Loading: .5 to 1.5 lbs. BOD/day Excavation Depth: 86" Inlet Invert: 65 1/2" Model M-1200A Capacity: • 1200 Gal. Holding • 1000 Gal. Treated Specifications: Apx. 950 lbs. Aeration Rates: 2300 cf/lb. BOD/day at 3 psig Compressor: 113 hp, 1725 rpm, 60 cycle, 115V Rated Capacity: 3 to 4 cfm — up to 8 psig KW 0.19 Diffuser: Disc Plate, Diaphragm type Organic Loading: 1.7 to 2.5 lbs. BOD/day Excavation Depth: 119" Inlet Invert: 89" PATENT PENDING TREATMENT SYSTEMS Model M-8A Capacity: • 800 Gal. Holding • 600 Gal. Treated Specifications: Apx. 625 lbs. Aeration Rates: 2950 cf/lb. BOD/day at 3 psig Compressor: 1/4 hp, 1725 rpm, 60 cycle, 115V Rated Capacity: 3 to 4 cfm — up to 8 psig KW 0.19 Diffuser: Disc Plate, Diaphragm type Organic Loading: 1 to 2 lbs. BOD/day Excavation Depth: 98 1/2" Inlet Invert: 72 1/2" Model M-2000A Capacity: • 2000 Gal. Holding • 1500 Gal. Treated Specifications: Apx. 1180 lbs. Aeration Rates: 2710 cf/lb. BOD/day at 4 psig Compressor: 1/2 hp, 1725 rpm, 60 cycle, 115V Rated Capacity: 6to7cfm—upto8psig KW 0,19 Diffuser: Disc Plate, Diaphragm type Organic Loading: 2.4 to 4.25 lbs. BOD/day Excavation Depth: 127 1/2" Inlet Invert: 98" 1501 Commerce Center Drive Franklin, Ohio 45005 937-746-2727 Fax: 937-746-1446 www.consolidatedtreatment.com e-mail: info@consolidatedtreatment.com Model M-1050A Capacity; • 1050 Gal. Holding • 800 Gal. Treated Specifications: Apx. 760 lbs. Aeration Rates: 2900 cf/lb. BOD/day at 3 psig Compressor: 1/4 hp, 1725 rpm, 60 cycle, 115V Rated Capacity: 3to4cfm —up to 8 psig KW 0.19 Diffuser: Disc Plate, Diaphragm type Organic Loading: 1.7 to 2.4 lbs. BOD/day Excavation Depth: 107" Inlet Invert: 80 1/2" Ccrltfied to ANSI/NS!' Slmidnrd 40 Class 1 Environmental Solutions M8 ii 98.5" 72.5" 12 M1050 M1200 C) Consolidated Treatment Systems, Inc. 2010 All Rights Reserved PROCEDURE TO ANCHOR NAYADIC MAWLJ A L_ E�,CER P't" ) s T STAINLESS STEEL CABLE ANCHOR -TYPE ANCHOR CoNG 12,ETE �UMPEYZ GuAR�S � cLARg sib?) D f-v �-ro, 9�n-12-1 A . 6(4�> 41-0 f Pi'46 AVM mt 6. �NOETE- OAwksT CLASS IV SM CAP MID) Z X 6V X k SSTL ROD OR CAEIE AND wAsHER ATTACIE TO LID AND EMBEDDED IN BALLAST -RING (TYP of 8) CR: _13 LCA T -PJNG" I CUSS I OR H BACKFILL AP TIC LIMrrS OF EXCAVATION z. i „ 2.50 ANCHORING THE NAYADIC TANK 2.51 When installing the NAYADic in areas with a high water table or in flood -prone areas, it may be advisable to anchor the tanks to prevent floatation or shifting. (see Fig. 2.3). 2.52 To anchor the tank, use four (4) 3/8 " galvanized steel eye bolts, four (4) 24-30" auger tie -downs, and 1/8" galvanized or stainless steel cable (minimum 500 lb test). 2.53 Level the tank and backfill to approximately 12" below the inlet pipe. 2.54 Place the cover on the basin. 2.55 Drill (4) 3/8" holes through the outer flanges of both the cover and basin. These holes should be drilled opposite the four inner tank support brackets. 2.56 Place a 1" washer on the eyebolt and insert into the hole previously drilled in the flange so that the "eye" is on the bottom. Place a second 1" washer on the eyebolt (top of flange) and fasten with nut. Do the same for the remaining 3 holes. 2.57 Screw each of the auger tie -downs into the ground below the 4 eyebolts. Care should be taken to insure the anchors are installed in either, undisturbed soil or well -compacted backfill. 2.58 Using the stainless steel cable, fasten the four eyebolts to the respective tie -down. (Option: The cable may be fastened to concrete bumper guards which are buried in surroLinding soil at a depth of at least 4' below grade.) 2.59 Finish backfilling around unit. 'ev: 01/16/05 CONTROLBOX 4" CLEAN -OUT 2. "UNION INLET OUTLET 4" 2. " COUPLIN UV BULB AND UART PROTECTIVE SLEEVE ASSEMBLY 4. " 4" PIPE UV HOUSIN REDUCIN C 1I F2 UV QUOTATION DATE: 27 May 2020 FIRM QUOTE FOR: NaVadicM1200-A* N AYA D I C7 WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEMS Milolii Beach Park Submitted via e-mail- Kelsie Sasabe ksasabe(a)-bowengineering.com PROJECT TMK: TBD M1200-A with Linear Compressor, 1000 GPD......... $ 14,950.00 plus State of Hawaii General Excise Tax (4.712%)= $ 15,654.44 • Price quote (location and load) requires spot delivery, which means the price quoted will possibly be subject to additional trucking costs. Provide delivery address for estimate of additional cost. All quotes valid for 30 days from date of quotation. • Delivery Address: A 2-year warranty and service contract provided by AINA ENGINEERS INC is included in the total cost. The service contract includes that all equipment therein shall be free from defects in materials and workmanship. The service contract is to be engaged and dated following the delivery of the Aerobic Unit. *All units are delivered complete with a linear compressor, a short (1 Y2") PVC extension, standard NAYADIC alarm system, fiberglass tank, F2 Standard ultraviolet light disinfection with control panel, and 2-year service contract. Unit accessories are to be installed following manufacturer's recommendations or as directed by engineer and/or inspector. No installation costs are included; only inspection of aerobic tank installation by AINA ENGINEERS INC personnel. Improper installation may void 2-year warranty. • Fifty percent (50%) down will be required for all orders. Accounts unpaid over 30 days will be charged a service charge of one- and one-half percent per month (18% per annum). Deposits may be made payable to AINA ENGINEERS INC, c/o American Savings Bank (ASB) account number 8102034560 routing number 321370765. Credit Card (CC) payments will be charged an additional fee of 3.7% ACCEPTED BY: PRINT NAME: (SIGN) DATE: PROVIDED BY AINA ENGINEERS INC POB 81, Holualoa, HI 96725 office (808) 895-6173 / fax (808) 331-0449 Aerobic and Traffic Rated Concrete Waste Tanks Rep= 2363-082106 I I Repon 2363-082106 Archaeological Assessment Survey I And Cultural Impact Assessment Study \rchaeological Assessment Survey South Kona Watershed Wd Cultural Impact Assessment Study ( Irrigation System Project iouth Kona Watershed I Lands of Papa to Kaulanamauna rrigation System Project I South Kona District, Island ofHawai`i (TMK:var.) ands of Papa KaulanI outh Kona District, Islanndd of Hawaii H of Technical Study for Chapter 343 Environmental Impact Study echnical Study for Chapter 343 Environmental Impact Study I PREPARED BY PcalK Rosendeh( Ph.D., Inc. (PHN) 224 8'ataeuenue Avenue H'lo,H I'i 96720 Paul H. Rosendahl, PhD, Inc. Ar 1-1ogical • Hia-1.1 • Cultml Resowee A9 tagcmeir Sa,dr'es & Services B-4 / 1 PREPARED FOR U.S. Depa ,tofAgricultre Natal Rarourcee Can —don Servhe o/ Bell CW/wH 11. Ltd. 2153 North KMg Street, Suite 200 Nonohdu. Nl 96819-4554 SEPTEMBER 2006 PHRIPaul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. Archaeokgiml• Nietedml •Cuff—IRexource Management Stadl.&Services NAwM u�w®nuau. arauw Hla.lncali sgxe (ewl+s9-1]ax tout la emxt3a G.ttF.. Gom 96nl (6]Il e]Wln SUMMARY At the request of Belt Collins Hawaii, Ltd, Paul H. Rosendahl, PhD., roc. (PHRI) conducted an arenseologicaI assessment survey and prepared a Guttural impam assessment for the saatth xana Watershed Irrigation System Project The project area consists of about 15,000 aces ofpublic and private lands inland (mauka) of Miloli'i, in South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. Included within the project area are portions of the Lands of Papa 2, Ampuka, Hoopuloo, Mtloli't, Omoka'a, Kalihi, Honomalino, Kapua, and Kaulanamauna The current project was done in c°nnccdcn with conceptual planning and regulatory review for a proposed water development projem within State Agricultural and Conservation District lands. The work was done in compliance with the Section 106 federal historic preservation review process (36 CPR Pact 800) mandated by the National Matmic Preservation Am of 1966, and in compliance with review requirements for historic pnxervation studies and cu tuml impact assessments done in connection with a Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) to be submitted to the Department of Land and Natural Resources - State of Hawaii, and with the preparation of any Environmental Assessment (EA) or Impact Statement (EIS) prepared in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 343 (Haw.Rev.Stat). The archaeological assessment survey was undertaken within well and reservoir sites and 50-foot- wide pipeline corridors located on both sides of numerous reeds. During the survey, walls, enclosures, and mounds were identified. Tentative functional interpretations fro the sites included marker, temporary habitation, boundary, and burial. The prehistoric remains encountered consist of sites and features documenting low -intensity, traditional native Hawaiian dryland agricultural use and associated temporary, or short-term, or permanent residential habitation, The findings correlate, well with the findings of previous surveys in the general area The historic features in the project area consist of numerous boundary walls that functioned for animal control or boundary walls between plots of lend. Several sites are recommended for further work if they cannot be avoided by placement of the waterline elsewhere. It is recommended the sites undergo archaeological inventory -level work to the foam of further data collection. Based on the current findings, it is anticipated that after the inventory -level work is completed, all of the information coment at the identified sites will have been adequately collected, and no further archaeological work, other than long-term preservation of burials, would be required. The overall project area has been extensively modified and developed during historic times, as evidenced by the extensive content agricultural use of the land and the findings of the archaeological assessment fieldwork done for the present project. Furthermore, there is an indication of any kind that the overall project area has any whist resources necessary to or currently being used by either native Hawaiian cultural practitioners exercising traditional and customary access and use rights for any purposes, or by individuals of any other cutural affiliation for any traditional cultural purposes. And finally, given the potential direct effects that might result from the minimally intrusive nature of the infrastructure of the proposed project, even if any cultural, historical, or natural resources of significant vane, were present somewhere within the overall project area, it would be highly unlikely that the proposed project would have any direct effects - adverse or otherwise- upon any such resources. Based on the negative results of the recently completed archaeological assessment survey and the absence of any evidence that the overall project area is currently being used for my legitimate traditional cultural purposes by either native Hawaiian cultural practitioners or individuals of any other cultural affiliation, it can be concluded that the proposed pmjeet should have an significant effects - match less any adverse impacts -upon my valued cultural, historical, or natural resources within the overall project area and that no mitigation actions of my kind are needed. Finally, it should be noted that in the unlikely instance that my legitimate cultural impact assessment issues should arise during the eaviromnmtal review period, they could be addressed adequately within the framework of the review process (i.e., from draft to final env"tranmmtal study). B-4 / 2 Contents Introduction I Background 1 Purpwe and Objectives - I Scope ofWak • 3 Project Ares Description 3 Previous Research 5 preview Archuealagkal Research 5 Summory of Documentary Information on Prehisicic andHistork Land Use 7 Implimdeas of Previous Arrhaealailk.1 and Documentary Research 12 Archaeological Assessment Survey 13 Survey Objectives • 13 Methodology 13 F dings 13 Concluding Assessment 23 Tentative General Significance Assessments and Recommended General Treatments Cultural Impact Assessment 27 Purpose, Background, and Objectives 27 Cuhunsl lope. Assessment and OEQC GuideMes • 30 Basic Gaide— Dacumerns 33 Present Study Scope and Methodology • 34 Findings 36 Concluding Assessment and Recommendations • 37 References Cited 38 Appendix: Selected Land Commission Awards Testimonies m Illustration - Figure I. Project Location • 2 Figure 2. Trans- Lacarum, 14 Figure 3, She Locations • 16 Figure 4. She 2363-3. Plan View 20 Tables Table I. Land Gmntt/ Land Commission Awards (LCA) Within Z,000 Feet of ProjW Corridors 10 Table L Summary of 1denoad Sher • 17 Table 3. Summary ofamrb. General SigWflcanee Assessments and Recommended General Treatmens • 24 N B-4 / 3 INTRODUCTION BACKGROUND At the request of Belt Collins Hawaii, Ltd, Paul H. Reaendahl, Ph.D., Inc. (PMU) conducted an archaeological ssama,nwt survey and Prepared a cultural impact assessment for the South Kona watershed Irrigation System Project The project area consists of approximately 15,000 acres of public and private lands located inland (masked of Miloli'i in the South Kona District on the Island of Hawaii. The project area is bounded on the north by the Papa I Homesteads, can the and (mauka) by the 3,000 foot elevation oentour, on the south by the Manuka Natural Area Reserve, and on the west (seaward, aakat) by the 800 foot elevation contour. Included within the project area are portions of the Lands of Papa 2, Amapulm, Hocpuloa, Miloli'i, Omoka'a, Kalihi, Honomalino, Kapua, and Kaulam nnumn (Figure 1). The current project was rbne in connection with conceptual planning and regulatory review for a proposed water development p ject within State Agricultural and Conservation District lands. The weak was done in compliance with the Section 106 federal historic preservation review process (36 CFR Pan 800) mandated by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, end in compliance with review requirements for historic preservation studies and cultural impact assessments done in connection with a Conservation District Use Application (CDUA) to be submitted to the Department of Land and Natural Resources — State of Hawaii, and with the preparation of any E-firemental Assessment (EA) or Impact Shu-'ent (EIS) prepared in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 343 (Haw.Rev.Stat). PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES Archaeological Assessment Survey The basic purpose of the archaeological assessment survey was to comply with all current historic preservation requ'veramu; of the Hawaii State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) and the Hawai'i County Planning Department (HCPD). The basic objectives of the archaeological assessment survey were to identify: (a) the general nature, extent, and potential significance of any archaeological —historical mmains that might be present, (b) the historic preservation implications of any such remains for the feasibility of any proposed firtne development: and (c) the general scope of work and level of effort for any subsequent archaeological —historic preservation work that might be required. Cultural Impact Assessment Study The basic purpose of the cultural impact assessment study was to comply with the requirements of Chapter 343 (Haw. Rev. Star), as amended by H.B. No.2895 H.D. I of the Hawai'i State Legislature (2000) and approved by the Governor as Act 50 on April 26, 2000, and which among other things requires that envin mnwml assessments (EA) and environmental impact statements (EIS) identify and assess the potential effects of any proposed project upon the "...cultural practices of the community and State..." Chapter 343 (7i w. Rev. Stat.) was amended by the State legislature because of the perceived need to assure that the environmental review process explicitly addressed the potential effects of any proposed project upon "....Hawai'i's euhuro, and traditional and customary rights." Guidelines previously prepared and adopted by the State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) (1997) provide compliance guidance. Both Act SO and the OEQC Guideltnes jar Asressitng Culrraul Impacts mandate consideration of all the different groups comprising the multi -ethic community of Hawaii. r 1------------ B-4 / 4 The specific objectives of the cultural impact assessment sandy ware to determine the following: (a) if the project area is currently being accessed by native Hawaiian cultural practitioners, or individuals of any other cultural groups, for any traditional and customary cultural uses; (b) if the proposed project would have any adverse impacts upon any identified current native Hawai, i or other culturat gmup uses of the area; and (c) what measures might be proposed to mitigate any adverse impacts the proposed project might have upon any identified current native Hawaiian or other cultural group was of the area. SCOPE OF WORK Based on discussions with Belt Collins Hawaii, Ltd., and our familiarity with both the general project area and the current regulatory review requirements of the SHPD and the HCPD, the following tasks were determined to be an appropriate scope of work for the proposed archaeological assessment survey and cultural impact assessment study l Conduct appropriate background review andes rearch, including compilation of existing infomraion on archaeological resources within the overall project area, 2. Consult with appropriate local community cultural and historical rafammnm; Office of Hawaiian Affairs sra$ and SHPD staff; 3. Identify, ..,act, and evaluate potential local inf ama nm; 4. Conduct informal (non -taped) informant interviews with identified knowledgeable local informants; 5. Conduct archaeological assessment fieldwork — including sample coverage pedestrian and vehicular survey fieldwork of well and reservoir sites and pipeline routes; 6. Analyze background informant information, field survey, and all other research data; 7. Prepare written draft and final reports (including report writing, review, and editing and production); 8. Coordinate and consult with client, client representatives, agency staff, etc.; and 9. Expert witness services (as requested). PROIECTAREA DESCRIPTION The project area comprises well and reservoir sites and pipeline corridors within Papa l and 2, Anapuka, Ho`opuloa, Miloli`i, Omoka`a, Kalihi, and Honomalino (TMK: (3)8-8-16:23;8-9-01:2,19 & 20; 8-9-02:12 & 14; and 8-9-13:27). The mauka limits of the project area are at the 3,000 foot elevation level, and the makal limits are at the 800 foot elevation level (Rgu 1). Mamabilim Highway extends across the project area north to south at about the 1,680-1,700 it elevation level. Annual rainfall in this min shadow area of Mauna Loa is c. 50 inches (127 era) (Armstrong 1983:63). The physiographic type found in the project area is Mauna Loa Undiameted Uplands, which are defined as "slopes with little or no established surface drainage" (Armstrong 1983:37). Soil types in the area include: Kaimu soil series, Puna extremely stony peat, Kona extremely rocky muck, and Ponalcu extremely rocky peat. The Kaimu series consists of Kaimu extremely, snmy pear, on 6 to 12% slopes. This soil is npmsentative Of the Kaman series of welldramcd, thin organic soils over 'a'a lava where Permeability is rapid, mnoff is slaw, and erosion is sfight. The Fong series consists of well -drained, thin, extremely stony organic soils over fragmented 'o'a lava, and is found at elevations rangrog from 1,000 to 3,000 fret. Kona extremely rocky muck is part of the Kona series, and consists of well -drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe lava bedrock These range in elevation from 1,000 to 3,500 feet. This soil type is used mostly for pasture and watershed. The Punaluu series consists of well -drained, thin organic soils over pahoehoe bedrock. These soils, gently sloping m moderately steep, ere an uplands at elevations ranging from near sea level to 1,000 feet (Sato et a1.:32-48). Vegetation within the project area varies greatly, but generally consists of commercial crops, such as coffee and macadamia nurs, and various grasses, ti (CordyRne termimhs), kukui (Aleuritas molucannrs), hacle-koa (Leucaena leucacephala), lanti ms (Lantana comam), Cluistmas-berry (SWarrus rershinth flies), agave (Agave sisalana), mango (khorgifem indlca), and thimblebeny (Rebus rasa folms). Vegetation within the specific project srea transects are discussed in more detail later in this report B-4 / 5 PREVIOUS RESEARCH PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESEARCH A search of the SHPD libur ry found that an systematic survey of the project area has been conducted. However, several formal and informal p jects have been conducted north of the current project area. The earliest survey, conducted by Reinecke (1930). was informal but extensive, and covered areas north of the current project area in Pllhoehoe 3. He discovered significant areas of house foundations, platforms, terraces, and burials, primarily along the coast. In the 1970s a statewide inventory of this part of the coast was conducted by the State of Hawai'i. Seven archaeological sites north of the current project corridor (based on Raineeke 1930; no new fieldwork was done) were identified. In 1980 Lloyd Soehren (1980) conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey north ofthe current project area, in Kaohe 4. These parcels had been awarded to the konahiki, Name, during the Great Mahele. A retaining wall formerly located in Parce138, along the coast, had been washed away by high surf prior to his survey. Along the eastern side of Panel 39 Soehren identified a recent grave platform and a second platform identified as probable graves sires. No other sires were identified. Paul nn H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., Inc. (PHRI), conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of the 7,400+ acre Farms of Kapm project area (Rosendahl 1993). During the survey, 56 sites were identified - including 21 previously recorded Hawaii Register of Historic Places (HRHP) sites. The 56 sites included component features. Functional types encountered included: residential complexes (25 sites), aS.-lemal complexes (5), maidential/agriculmrl complexes (2), burials (2), foot trails (transportation) (2), ceremonial (religious) (4), holua slide (1), refuge cave (1), historic camp (1), and unknown function (1). The sites and features tended to be concentrated in the northern portion of the project area, in both inland and coastal areas. According to the report, the central and southern portions contained slightly less sites (Rosendahl 1983:27). The greatest density and variety of archaeological resources were found to be within the coastal zo which contained almost every site type identified during the project (excepting agricultural features and a refuge cave). inland areas in the norther portion of the project area were found to contain concentrated agricultural features and several associated residential features. Inland -coastal oriented foot trails linked these agricultural kipuka to coastal residential settlements. Other inland site types encountered during the project were refuge and residential caseveral of which contained structural modifications. These caves appeared to be concentrated in the central and southern inland portions of the project area. Subsequent to the Rosendahl survey, in December 1983, Manhew Spriggs of the Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii - Manua conducted a reconnaissance field trip to the Farms of Kapua property (Spriggs 1983). Areas examined were generally within inland and southern p-ions of the property —portions not previously covered by Rosandshl (Spriggs 1983:1). Spriggs recorded 18 sites: calms, a refuge co,re, C-shapes, mounds, mbelcave shelters, paved trail sections, terraces, walled house sites, agricultural features, a possible historic burial, an enclosure, and a bulldozed midden matter. Based an his r aissance field trip and on the earlier Romodahl (1983) survey. Spriggs proposed three main prehistoric land use maws for the project area: a coastal occupation and dryland agricultural mate: a barren, lower slope and agricultural kipuka zone associated with temporary shelters, trails, and refuge coves; and an inland intensive agricultural cone (probably a souther extension of the Kona Field System) associated with permanent occupation (Spriggs 1983:11). In 1988 PHRI conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of thee. 5,784-acre Fauns of Kapea Mauka Lands (Haan and Walker 1988). In this large area, p-ions of which are within the current project corridor, 297 site (951 component features) were recorded. Forty-six sites bad been previously identified and 251 were newly identified. The sites were in fair to good condition. Generally, they were concentrated along sinkhole ca maltabes, trail systems, kipuka, and old pdhoshoe lava flows. Site included multiple- and singlecomponent site. Formal feature types within the sites included C- and L-shapes, enclosures, platforms, terraces, calms, petroglyphs, mounds, pahoehoe excavations, overhangs, lava sinkhole, caves, mbes, trails, pits, alignments, 1eve1 areas, and m scellaneous medified areas. Probable three ... I interpretations were determined for most sites. Furseionel types encountered included agriculture, burial, marker, temporary habitation, quarry, refuge, transportation, water source, religious, tool meaufschrring, and rock an (Haan and Walker 1988rii). In 1993, PHRI conducted an archaeological inventory survey of the Ka'ahe Subdivision (Head et sl. t994), upland and north of the current project area. During the survey, nine sites were newly identified. The sites comprised mounds, walls, enclosures, modified depressions, C-shaped walls, platforms, retaining walls, alignments, and nails. Numerous agricultural features were also scattered throughout the project area (Head et al. 1994). In 1995 Cultural Surveys Hawaii (Walsh et al. 1995) conducted an archaeological inventory survey on a parcel at Kukuiopae 2, South Kona, north of the mordent project area. During the survey, on the east side of Mamalahoa Highway, between 1,240 and 1,640 feet above sea level, fifteen sites were identified. Four sites, consisting of wall complexes and an enclosure, were related to traditional Hawaiian agriculture (50- 10-57-19675, 19676, 19680 and 19781), The remaining ten sites were related to historic homesteads (Sites 19669-19674 and 19677 to 19679 and 19683). The sites included charcoal ovens, water camhgrents, house sites, a habitation complex, walls, and an enclosure. In March, 2002, PHRI conducted an archaeological assessment of Magoon Estate lands (South Kona Maked Properties) in P6hoehoe 1-4, Maumorm 1-6, Maku'u 1-3, Haleili, Haukalua 1, Alm 1-22, and Kaohe 1-4, South Kona District (Rosendahl 2002). The archaeological fimtres found during deis survey re very concentrated and represent the large settlement area described by Reinecke (1930) for this area. Archaeological features included walls, platforms, enclosures, possible graves, terraces, and pavings. Madre shell contacts consisted of opihi, strombm, cowrie, and various other marine shell species. Upland, archaeological feaoues diminished as the slope incersased. The extreme slope heading mauka lacked archaeological sites and features, as preferable areas of prehistoric settlement would logically be nearer the coast, where marine resources could be procured. In 2003 PHRI conducted an assessment survey of an approximately 5.0 acre upland parcel in the Ka'ohe Ranch Subdivision (Corbin 2003a). During the survey several field boundary walls, two possible prehistoric enclosures, a platforn, and rmrrerom prehisiorirhistoric clearing mounds were encountered. The walls were thought to be pan of the well -documented Kona Field System. Also in 2003, PHRI conducted an archaeological reconnaissance survey of seaward portions of a 183- cre parcel (Magoon Ranch Oceanfront Property) located in Pahoehoe 3, South Kona Distrito. Features recorded included a possible prehistoric wall , seven prehistoric paved areas, two platforms, an ahupua'a boundary wall, two prehistoric enclosures and a bordering habitation wall, oar enclosure, two Gshapes, an L-shape, a water catchment wall, and a wall segment. Most of these features were pan of Reinacke's Sire 4186. The archaeological features diminished in intensity and quantity as the slope and elevation increased going east. This was probably due to the Steepness of the dentin, which would have made the area less than optimal in terms of pmhistDdc settlement and subsistence (Corbin 2003b). B-4 / 6 In 2004, He. and Associates surveyed a a 94-scre parcel in Pahoehoe 1, South Kona District, north w the current project area, Twenty-three sites comprising eleven single features and twelve complexes were identified. The features, included enclosures, mounds, terraces, Platforms, modified outemps, walls, Pavements, modified knolls, kua'lwi, a water tank, and roads. Feature function included permanent habitation, agriculrme, ceremonial, water same, fivearck control, transportation, burial, and temporary habimtion (Haan and Henry 2004). SUMMARY OF DOCUMENTARY INFORMATION ON PREHISTORIC AND HISTORIC LAND USE There is very little documentary, information on the project area and its vicinity. The infcramenor presented hem has been compiled using a number of sources, primarily Rosendehl (1983), which includes research on the OA yrm'a of Kaput and its general vicinity. This summery includes mythological references, a brief historical sketch of the general area, historical references, and pre-I900 land record information (including Land Commission Award testimonies, and cartographic source). Several legendary and tracitionel source refer to a man named Kalaehim, who was known for his strength and bravery. Kalwhina was said to have once delivered six canoes from Nawaahookui in upland Kapua to his brother Kalaspuni on the coast at Kearhou. Kalaehina eventually became a ruling chief by conquering Kamalalawam. One legend concerning Kapua is entitled "The Despotic Chiefs of Kau." In this legend, a ruling chief, before he sails from Kona, orders his servants to meet him at Wai-ahu-kind with prepared food. The chief then inconsiderately proceeds not to land his canoes at Wai-ahu-kini; he is heading first to Kai-li-kii, then to Ka -pis -a, then eventually the lands at Ka-alu-alu. Upon his landing, his angry servants stone him to death (Haan and Walker 1988). Within her section on mythology relevant to Kapua and vicinity, Silva references a large land unit, Kapalilua, which is said to have contained several smaller ahupua'a (probably including Kapua). Silva also ref nces several geographic land units with which the name Kapalilua occurs (including Papa, Okm, Kapua, and Honokua). Two other mythological references ("Story of Lonoikamakehikf' and "Legend of Kuapaksa') within Silva mention Kapalilua; however, the boundaries of Kapalilua, Silva writes, cannot "readily be determined."(Silva 1983) (Haug and Walker 1988). Historically, Silva indicates that specifically mentioned as within Kapalilua is Honomalim, where Ke'eau-moku, during a period of warfare with Keawe-'opala for control of Hawaii Island, came to pledge his support to Ka -land 'opu'u. Later, following the death of Ka -land 'opu'u, Ke'e-au-moku mounted from Maui and took up residence sa Houck- in Kapalilua, eventually moving westward to Honordalino and Miloli-i. It is also indicated in historic records that Kamehameha I fished for 'ahi at Kapalilua and that John Papa Ii briefly passed through Kapalilua in 1843 (Haan and Walker 1988). Describing events about twenty years later. Kamekm ones again references Kapalilua. In the 1770s, Kelam'opu'u (of Hawai'l), and Maui's King Kahekili were in conflict. In Ka delem's account, Kapalilua became the home of same chiefs who were displaced from Maui. Because of their assistance to Kalani'opuu, the Kapalilua lands became the personal property ofthee chiefs, as noted below: During the war between Ka-lani-opu-u and Ka-hekili, between the years 1777 and from 1,000 to 3,000 fuer, they prospered increasingly, From approximately 1,000 to 1779, the parents of Ka -'alai -menu went re Hawaii with their whole household and 2,000 Real, breadfruit flourished. company of attendants and followed in the rear of Ka-lani-opuu's army, together Tam was I with the twin half brothers of Ke'e-au-moka. [These were) Ka-me-c- -make and P aced dry from an altitude of 1,000 to 3,000 feet. An old method of a-m Kaaawn, who had the same father (Knerepoepim) but dill ent mothers, Ku -ma- Planting taro in Kona, described to us by Lakalo at Ho'okem, was to plant the ai-ku being the mother of Ke'saumoku and Ka-m—O of the twins. Keawe-a-heulu I cuttings in the lower, warmer zone where they would start to grow quickly and then also belonged to their company. His estates were the lands of Kapalilua. Kaawaloa, to transplant them to the higher forest zone where soil was rich and deep and where and Kealakekua: those of Ka-me'e-ia-moku and his brother under Ka-1mi 'opu'u score was ample for their second period of growth, in which then corms are said were Kekaha and the lands of that section... an have developed to sin average of 25 pounds each (Handy, Handy and Fulani 1972:524-525). At the time when Ka-limi 'opu'u reamed re Hawaii in see Captain Cook called Lone, �au- all the chiefs rammed with him to Hawaii, and Ke'eecolcu also left Hana, went to live at Honoku s in Kmalilua, and later moved westward with his wife and 'children to Honomalino and Miloli'i. [Kamakau 1961:310, 3851 Kamakau also recorded that in the later years of his life (c. 1811 to 1918), Kamshameha I frequented the 'ahi fishing grounds of Ka -pall -Iota (Kamakau 1961:203). John Papa Pi (1959) mentions lands of Kapalilua in passing, at several paints in his history of Hawaii, In I853, Fi and his ward, Chiefess Victoria Kamamala, traveled along the coast of Kapalilue. While in the region he learned that the smallpox epidemic had reached Haleili. Such epidemics were one of the important contributors to the demise of the native population throughout the islands. i'i and party spent the night at Kapua, as described below: Because it was very calm, daylight found them a Papa, at Kapalilua. Not a breath of wind was stirring there. After breakfast Ksmamalu asked to leave the ship and go by rowboat, an,she and Kaohe, son of Mahuka, went along close to land until they reached Kolo and Kukuiopac before the ship did. When the vessel arrived, the residents were ready to supply it with fuel. They were greeted with the news that smallpox had reached Halsili, about ten ahupua'a away fiom Papa, where death was making havoc. It was said that some people from Oahu had caused the spread of the disease. The ship was becalmed that day, but when evening came, a land breeze, the K-W, came up. The nonce Kewai is a Kona tern meaning a land breeze mixed with rain. The wind helped the ship until dark, when the dew -laden breeze arose, So they arrived at Namopm, outside of Waipunsula and Kilos, at Kealakekua...F'i 1959:1711 The rich, forested upland region of the Kapalilm lands were an important resource to the native families of the land. In. this region (up to around the 5,000 foot elevation) grew the native koa trees, large '8hi'a, and a wide range of other plants, which werecared thread harvested --my gemratic- (Maly 2000). Conducting research and informant interviews in the 1920s-1940s, ethnographers Handy and Handy (1972a) traveled through the Kapalilua area and studied the customs and practices of the native residents. Their description, excerpts of which are given below, covers lands extending from the shore to the upland region, including the cument project area: In the time of intensive native cultivation, South Kona was planted in mines determined by rainfall and moisture. Near the dry seacoast potatoes were grown in quantity, and coconuts where sand or soil among the lava near the shore favored their growth. tip to 1,000 feet grew small bananas -which rarely limited, and poor cane: B-4 / 7 In the upland agricultural zone, there were several methods of dryland planting techniques used by the fncrers. The techniques included makitlus and 'umoki (planting in mulched holes): pu'epu`e (planting in earthen or stone mulched moods); and pa ku en i (planting n kukut groves where trees were felled and used as growing troughs) (Handy and Pukai 1972a:106-109). Fields were also marked by a series of kuaiwi, kuakus, and kuiuna (walls and terraces) (Handy and Fulani 1972a:50-51). The environmental conditions of Kapalilua led the native residents to develop a subsistence based system of seasonal travel across the land. Native traditions recorded in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, and oral history interviews with individuals boar in the early 1900s, indicate that the families of the region maintained residences at various elevations. Primary residences were situated close to the ale ran (near the present day Belt Highway), and along the shoreline. Temporary residences, which were recurrently utilized over a long pried of time, were located fit Cher upland in the planting fields andinlocations where other mounmin resources existed to be collected. This procurement system, which spanned elevations from the shore to the upper limits of the high mountain slopes, was ficilitated by the development of numerous mauka-makai trails throughout the various ahapiar a.. Many of these trails continued to be traveled on by foot (or horseback in the historic period) by residents and landowners throughout the early 1900s. Later, by the 1930s, some of these trails were modified for travel by automobile (Maly 2000). English missionary William Ellis in 1823 referred to the village and the surrounding coumryside of Kapua as desolate. He states `nothing can exceed the barren aad solitary appearance of this part of the island, not Only from the want of fresh water, but from the rugged and broken tracts of lava of which it appears to be entirely composed" (Ellis 1963:124-126). Other early historic accounts of Kapua include one by an English woman who mentions a steamship, which briefly stops in Kapua during the early 1860s, and another 1920 account of a holua slide by A.S. Baker. A check of the Henry Kekahuna Collection by Silva revealed a possible explanation for the name Kapua: "Pu'a-a kind ofbig tree." (Haun and Walker 1988). Ld records indicate there are numerous land grants and Land Commission Awards (LCA) in the projanect area. Table 7 includes only those within 2,000 feet of any project condor. The Appendix provides numerous LCA testimonies. Silva's report includes typescript translations of claimants' testimonies in the vicinity of Kapm. The testimonies describe houselots, agricultural plots, boundaries, and origin of ownership. According to land records, the entire Kaput ahupua'a (14,240 acres) was originally awarded to W.P. Leleiohoku, an heir of Kuakmi (son of Ke's-au-moku). Leleiohoku was a husband first to Nahimaena, then to Princess Ruth Keelikolim. Within Leleiohoku's claim are eight other claims ranging from 1.37 to 4.67 tens. Seven of these eight claims appear to be situated inland (east) of Kaput. The lands in these seven claims were apparently suitable for growing taro, sweet potatoes, anownum, watermelon, and bananas. The remaining eighth claim is located on the coast, outside of the present project area Table 1. Land Grants/ Load Cotnmhrid— I B-4 / 8 Only one site (2363-7) identified during the co ent project is within a known land grant or LCA (L.G. 3199). This agricultural or boundary wall is typical of the atone walls built to demarcate agricultural boundaries or to keep cattle in or out of a certain area. Based on LCA testimonies (Appendix) tenants' claims were small, averaging between two and four acres. Crops grown included taro, sweet potatoes, bananas, wauke, lauhala, gourd, coffce, sugar cane, yam, arrowroot, and watermelon. W IMPLICATIONS OF PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND DOCUMENTARY RESEARCH Based on documentary evidence and the findings of previous archaeological investigations in the general vicinity, and especially findings in the large Kapua fame area (portions of which are within the currant Project area), it was thought that the following prehistoric features might be identified during the current assessment survey: C. and L-shapes, enclosures, platforms, terraces, cairns mounds, pahodwe excavations, overhangs, lava sinkholes, caves, tubes, pits, and alignments. However, because almost the entire project area was along road corridors, and therefore had been extensively modified during road building and installation of utilities, it was expected that few archaeological features would be found and that they would be confined to areas that had escaped such disturbances. Concealing historic features, documentary evidence and the findings of previous archaeological investigations in the general vicinity, (e.g., Haun 2004, Rosendahl 1983) indicate that historic features may include corrals, ranching walls, animal pens, and boundary walls. These would be found in areas along the corridor not previously bulldozed or subjected to other land altering activities. W3 B-4 / 9 ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT SURVEY SURVEY OBJECTIVES The overall purpose of the archaeological easessment survey was to comply with all current historic preservation requirements of the SHPD and HCPD. The basic objectives of the survey were to determine the following: 1. The general naive, extem, and potential significance of any archaeological -historical remains that might be present; 2. The historic preservation implications of any such remains for the feasibility of any proposed future developmmt; and 3. The general scope of work and level of effort for my subsequent archaeological - historic preservation work that might be appropriate and/or required. METHODOLOGY The fieldwork for the assessment mry y was carried out July 14-15 and 18-23, 2005, and August 16- 17, 2006, by PM Supervisory Archaeologist Alan B. Corbin, M.A., assisted by Field Technician Leonard Kubo. The survey included well and reservoir sites, and numerous road corridors (Figure 2). The proposed well and reservoir sites were approximately 100 by 100 foot areas. These meal were surveyed 100% by means of 10-m wide transth acts oriented nor -south. The road corridors traversed the lands of Papa 2, Anmuka, Ho'bpi loa, MIlolpi, Omoka`a, Kalif, and Honomaliao. The corridor surveys involved 50-fot- wide survey transects located an both sides of each corridor. Surveyors walked parallel to the corridors, at the center of each transect (25 feet on either side of the surveyors). Ground visibility at the well and reservoir sites was good to excellent. Visibility in the project corridors was fair to excellent, with the majority of the area having good to assailant visibility. when site features were encountered they were flagged with blue flagging tape and recorded on PHRI site recordation forms and in a field notebook The approximate locations of the sites were noted on field maps provided by Belt Collins Hawaii, Ltd FINDINGS For the purposes of discussion, the project area has been divided into fourteen sections (Tmnsects 1-14) (Figure 2). Transact l is Papa Bay Homestead Road. Transom 2 is Miloli'i Road. Traosect 3 is Honomalim Drive. Tmnsects 3a and 3b are short corridors that branch offof Honomalino Drive, Trmsect 3c is Ala Malino Lme. Transact 4 is Ala Palms, Lane. Transec%4a-d are corridors then brmch off ofAf Pakma Lana. Transact 5 consists of Huanui Road and a portion of the Old Mamalahoa Highway. Transact 6 consists of a road that parallels Hoopuloa Farms Road, located just south, and includes a short section that generally parallels the present Mamalahoa Highway. Treated 7 consists of Ho'opuloa Farms Road and a connecting short condor segment that connects the road m the present Mamalahoa Highway. Tmnacet 8 is a short corridor connecting Ho'opuloa Farms Road and an musesed fazm road running parallel and just on the north. Transect 9 is a long portion of the present Mamalahoa Highway. Transact 10 is an inaccessible and overgrown corridor that extends fund Transact 6. Transect 11 is a long corridor that runs along a portion of the boundary between the Scum Rona District and the Ka'u District, at the northern edge of Inge macadamia nut groves. Transact 12 extends east of Transact 5, and Transact 13 extends northward firm Transect 12 and connects with Trensem 4. Transient 14 is a short tmnsect extending m the east off of Transect 4s. - Transect 1 This transact extends east from the present Mamalahoa Highway and ends at the upper end of Papa Homestead Road, which is st approximately the 2,000 ft elevation level. Much of this tmosect extended through modem houselou. Vegetation was dominated by 'ahi'a (Metrosidems sip.) and Christmas -berry, (Sehinur terebmthifolius), and included guava (Psidtuns sp.), hapu'u (Ciborium splendens), ti (Cordyb'ne terminalts), kukui (Akuritar nsolucanna), haole-koa (Leucaeno leueo pholer), lantern (Lantana censors), agave (Agave skakna), mango (Mangifera irdica), and thimblebeny (Rubus rasaefolius). Three archaeological sites consisting of 13 features were identified in the road corridor. Many of the features were historic boundary wags. (See Figure 3 for all sita/feature locations; Tabk 2 provides a an of identified sites and features.) Site 2363-I, Feature A - Site 2363-I, Feature A consists of the main boundary walls that run pamllel to Papa Bay Homestead Road, on the north and south sides. Most of the existing walls are on the south side, approximately 1.5-2.0 re south of the road The walls are generally in fart to good condition. They are deteriorated in some areas, especially on curves where the road has been widened, and in other areas they are non-existent, having been removed for landscaping purposes by parcels owners. The wails vary in length, width, and thickness, but are generally 4 to 5 courses high (1.0 m high), and two to fora courses thick (0.70 ea 090 eu thick). The walls are composed of 'a'a lava, with rocks varying in size from 0.2-0.5 se in maximum diameter, with most being in the 0.2-0.4 range. In general, the well on the south side extends the entire length of Papa Bay Homestead Road. The wall on the north side is generally I sent only on the eastern end of the corridor, it extends from approximately 12 m downhill (west) of Telephone Pole #8 to about 15 west, then is discontinuous for about 40 in, and then continuous again till it ends in rubble at Telephone Pole #3. Site 2363-I, Feature B This is an a'a boundary wall that runs obliquely off of 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, approximately 60 m from the finer main curve going west from the end of Papa Bay Homestead kd, at an angle of 135 degrees true north. It rims an unknown distance outside of the current project corridor. it is stacked four ursea high (0.75 m 1.00 m) and is two courses thick (0.75 m wide). Rock sizes we generally 0.30 to 0.40 an in maximum diameter, with some larger meks 0.50 m+. Site 2363-1, Feature C This is an 'e'er boundary wall that tuns obliquely off of 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, approximately 12 raw west (downhill). It runs an unknown distance outside of the current project candor at an angle of 102 degrees. It s stacked four courses high (0.75 to 1.00 m) rmd is two courses thick (0.75 m wide). Rock sins an, generally 0.30 to 0.40 on in maximum diameter, with some larger rocks 0.50 m+. 15 B-4 / 10 PHRI Temporary Site No. Formal FUWWSU Type Tentative AgelFunoOonal lntaMietw8on 2363i CMPlml(10 features) - A Wal Hlabrc Boundary e Well Hlslorc Boundary C Wall Hisbrle Boundary B Well Hstanc Boundary E Wall Hisbnc Boundary F Wal Histork Boundary 0 Wal Hisbdc Boundary_ H Wbil Hislpnp Boundary I Well HeWft S.rdary W.11 Hisbnc Boundary 2363-2 Terrace - Hlatonc Permanent Habitatbn 2383-3 C plea (5leabees) - A Mounda (3) P.eible Prehlftft"ltonc Bud.] B Ennlomme PmhlstorkJHisbnc Permanent Habitation C EnN.ure Pmhls(o Hbtodc Pennanem Habitation C Mo.d PrehbtoncHlebrlc Agrkultunel E Terrece PrehlstatCF7lsbtic Water Refentlan 23634 End— Prehlatanc Temporary HabOafon 23835 Well Historic Boundary 236 Mound Prehlstalc AgncWWmVPosable Burial 2363-7 Wal HiatoW Bountlary 23&t-6 Complea (3 batures) A Cairns (e 8) Hlsbnp Marker B Wire Fen. Historic Bountlary/Anmlal Conto C - Raad Historic Transportation 2389.9 Wall Bountlary 9 Sitea 23 Feaheea WA B-4 / 11 Site 2363-I, Feature D This is an 'a'a boundary wall that =a perpendicular off of 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the south, outside the current p ject corridor boundary. Its characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363.1, Feature E This is an 'a'a boundary wall that lies between Telephone Poles 6 and 7. It runs perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the south, outside the current project corridor boundary. Its characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363.1, Feature F This is an 'ad boundary wall that lies approximately 30 on downhill from Telephone Pole #7 on the north side of Papa Bay Homestead Rd. The wall runs perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Femme A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the north, outside the current project corridor boundary. Its characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363-1, Feature G Feature H consists of two 'a'a boundary walks that fie approximately at Telephone Pole #6, on the north side of Papa Bay Homestead Road. The walls tun perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the north, outside the current project corridor boundary. The walls are approximately 12 an apart. Theis characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363-I. Feature H This is an 'ad boundary wall that lies approximately at Telephone Pole #4 on the north side of Papa Bay Homestead Road. The feature runs perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the north, outside the current project corridor boundary, at 210 degrees. Its characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363-I, Feature I This is an 'a'a boundary wall that lies approximately at Telephone Pole # 2 on the south side of Papa Bay Homestead Road. The wall mars perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the south, outside the extent project corridor boundary. Its characteristics are similar In the boundary walls described above. Site 2363-I, Featurej This is an 'a'a boundary wall the( lies approximately at the eastern and of the project area, on the south side of Papa Bay Homestead Road. The wall runs perpendicular off of Site 2363-1, Feature A boundary wall, an unknown distance to the south, outside the current project corridor boundary. Its characteristics are similar to the boundary walls described above. Site 2363-2 This is at the approximate eastern end of Transact #l. It appears to be a historic house platform or terrace; however, it is we overgrown with vegetation to discern its feature type or dimensions. It is, however, at least several meters in length and width. Two potsherds and one piece of glass were noted in the vicinity. B-4 / 12 Site 2363.3 Site 2363-3 extends outside of the present pr ject area corridor. The portion of this site within Transect 01 is composed of five features: Feature A (three possible burial annuals); Feature B (an enclosure); Feature C (an enclosure); Feature D (an agricultural mound); and Feature E (terrace) (Figure 4). The site may also include a few minx agricultural features that have been obscured by vegetation. If this site is to be impacted in the forme, further derailed retarding would be necessary. Feature A is a series of three mounds. Due to the fact that they are well built and laid out in a row, approximately, 3.0 on apart, it is probable they am burial mounds. Feature A-1 is an oval mound 2.5 no to length by 2.0 no in width, stacked five courses high (0.75 m). The 'a'a stones of the mound are 0.2-0.7 as in maximum diameter, with most being 0.3-0.4 no. The feature is rambled on the downslope side. Feature A-2 is an oval mound 2.7 on in length, aad stacked 4 to 5 courses (0.30 to 1.0 j. The 'a'a and pahoehoe swam comprising the mound range from 0.2-0.5 m in dion eter, with most being 0.3-0.4 on. Several larger stones are on the outside, with smaller scones comprising the interior. Feature A-3 is an oval mound 2.0 m in length and 0.6 no in height. The mound is faced on the sides with 'a'a stones 0.1-0.4 m in diameter, with most being 0.1-0.20 m. It is mounded an top, not as level as the previous examples, and is tumbled on the north side. Feature B is a square enclosure, faced on the interior and exterior, the east wall of which is the boundary wall (2363-1, Feahve A) that runs parallel to Papa Bay Homestead Road. The other three walls surround a level surface. These ''e d walls are well stacked 5 to 6 courses high (0.70 m) and 6 to 8 courses wide, ranging from 1.0 to 2.0 m in width. The walls are very level on the top. The rock sizes range from 0.15 to 0.40 an in diameter. The interior of the anclosure measures c. 10 an by 10 m. Feature C is an enclosure c. 12.0 m in length, c. 5.0 to 7.0 an in width, and 0.90 m in height. The crelcatere walls are composed of a'a scenes and are faced an the interior and exterior. On the south side the wall is stacked 6 to 7 courses high and is care -filled. On the north side the wall are approximately 0.65 to 0.75 in width and are tumbled. The rocks in the wall range from 0.20 to 0.40 m in diameter, with most 0 2- 0.3 m in diameter. Artifacts noted within and on top of the walls included two pieces of porcelain, remains of s metal bucket, and the remains of a metal cane knife blade. Feature D is a small mound 0.35 an in height, located between Feature C and Papa Bay Homestead Road. The wall 6 loosely constructed and is probably an agricultural mound (o her agricultural mounds were noted in the general vicinity south and downhill of this mound). Feature B is a terrace. approximately 6.0 an south of Site 2363-3, Feature C (enclosure). The terrace wall is approximately 10 on long ands faced on the south side. Transect 2 This transact extended vast from Mandated- Highway along Miloli'i Road, and ended at or. the 1,200 R elevation Level. Much of this ttansect was composed of modem homelou. Vegetation was dominated by 'dhi'a (Meo-Weras sp.), Christmas -berry (Schinus tembinthifoltus Raddi), and agave (Agave.asalana (Engelm.] Pandas). Several macadamia nut farms are also present along this dansect. On this =meet two archaeological sites were recorded. 8 e d w 8 LL w '+p3AE4Y:n� r � o d 0 f Eaj 0 X i 0 I a d F F tl taanNnlNna I Site 2363-4 Site 2363-4 is a temporary habitation enclosure c. 7.0 in south of Miloli'i Road it is c. 7.5 no in length and 2.8 in in width, and ranges from 0.20 to 0.70 in in height The walls are c. 1.3 in wide. The makai side is well stacked and faced on the inside (tat outside); the stacking is seven courses high; the mauko side is cracked four courses high and is more tumbled. The 'ad rocks of the eaclosure are 0.30 to 0.60 in in diameter, with most being 0.30 to 0.50 m. Generally, the enclosure is very tumbled, and there are trees growing inside of it Site 2363-5 Site 2363-5 is a boundary wall section oa the south side of Miloli i Road The section begins c. 1,287 m west (makai) of Mamalahoa Highway. It runs intermittently makat for approximately 160 m The wall probably extended further in the past; bulldozing has probably destroyed the wall in most areas. The characteristics of ihis wall closely resemble those of Site 2363-1, Feature A. Transect 3 Transect 3 is Honomalino Drive. Transects 3a and 3b are short corridors that branch off of He rs omalino Drive. Transect 3c is Ala Mahan [one. This minaret was mostly along paved roads and residences, with domesticated mango, macadamia nut tees, and ornamentals. Many areas along Honomalino Drive, in particular, have been previously disturbed by bulldozing and road creation. Running southeast of Ala Pakaua Lane, the vegetation becomes primarily grasses, 'dhi'a, and macadamia out twin. A reservoir site is located near the intersection of Transacts 3 and 3b. No archaeological resources ware noted in the minutia or within the reservoir site. Transect 4 Transect 4 is Ala Pakaua Lam Transacts 4a-d an, corridors that branch off of Ala Pakaua Lane. The vegetation in this transect, up to about the 2,280 ft level, consists of manicured lawns, mango, and macadamia nut trees. Eastward from this point, the vegetation consists of partially open grassland interspersed with 'ohi'q Christmas -berry, guava, hapa'a, and various grasses, with scattered macadamia nut tree f mu. At higher elevations rainforest vegetation begins. Transect 4 ends at a proposed well and reservoir site at the approximate 2,800 ft. elevation level. Them is also a proposed well site at the northern end of Transect 4b, and a proposed reservoir site cast of the intersection of Transecte 4 and 4d. No archaeological resources were encountered in these tmnsects or at the well/roammair sites. Transect S Transect 5 consists of Hiscom Road and a portion of the Old Memalahoa Highway. At its mad. end the road connects to Honomalino Drive. Vegetation in this transact mirrors that in Transect 4. No archaeological resources were identified in this transecr. Transect 6 Transect 6 consists of an strummed dirt road that parallels Ho'opulua Farms Road, located just south, and includes a short section of old Mamalahm Highway (that generally parallels the present Mamalahoa Highway) and ends at the approximate 1.120 foot elevation level. Vegetation m this twasect was dominated a by Cluisnnas-berry, guava, and 'okra. One archaeological site was recorded in the transact. 21 a B-4 / 13 Site 2363.6 Site 2363-6 is a rock mound c. 8.0 in south of the unnamed road (Figure 3). It is oval, and 2.75 m in length by 2.0 in in width, with a height of 0.75 m It is piled 5 in 6 courses high in some places, but is somewhat tumbled. The rock sizes range from 0.10 to 0.60 m in diameter, with moat being 0.301. 0.40 in. This is probably an agricultural or burial mound Transect 7 Transect 7 consists of Ho'opuloa Farms Road and a short corridor segment that connects the road to the present Mamalahoa Highway. The hansom extends from Mamalahoa Highway and ends at the approximate 1,120 ft eevation level. Vegetation in this transact included Christmas -berry, 'Ohio, guava, and various grasses. This transect was heavily disturbed, primarily by past bulldozing. No archaeological resomces were encountered. Transect 8 This trensect is a 4-whee1 drive dirt road running north -south between Trusects 6 and 7. Vegetation in this tmnsect is similar m that in Transects 6 and 7. No archaeological resources were noted in the uansect. Transect 9 Transect 9 is a long portion of the present Mamilahaa Highway. The primary vegetation along this route was Christmas -berry, 'ohi'a, macadamia net, and various vines and grasses. Two archaeological sires werc worded. Site 2363-7 Site 2363-7 is a boundary wall 43 feet east of the edge of Mamalahoa Highway. The wall is 4 to 5 courses high (0.75 m), with a width of 0.60 to 0.70 in. The 'a a rocks comprising the wall are 0.is to 0.35 in in diameter, with most being 6.20 to 0.30 in. The wall was not core -filled. This wall is continuation of a rock wall depicted on the 1982 U.S.G.S. Quadrangle map, and tuns an unit— distance east. The wall appears to have been bisected by the construction of Mamalahoa Highway. Site 2363-8 Site 2363-8 is a group of approximately six cairns, a fence, and an old road along the west edge of Mamalahoa Highway. The calms, measuring c. 0.35 ro 0.60 in in height, appear in be associated with the post -and -wire fence, as they are set exactly on the fence line. The .aims may also be easoci ited with an old mad, barely visible at this point due to extensive overgrowth, that tuns approximately parallel, and several meters west of the cairns. Transect 10 This hansect was not surveyed due to the lack of locational flagging in the field. The approximate area of the transact is heavily overgrown with vegetation similar in that mentioned for Transacts 6, 7, and 8. M B-4 / 14 Transect I Transect I is a lug corridor that runs along the northern boundary of Meepanns. The southern boundary of the housed is a macadamia nut grove. North of Tmnscct I I is State Conservation District land. The vegetation in the northem pardon of the transact consists primarily of Christmas -berry, 'iihi'a, guava, and various grasses. At the east and of Trusem 11 is a well and reseenmir site (at the C. 2,800 ft elevation levee. No archaeological resources were entramoned at the well and reservoir site or along the tnmai— Transect 12 Transect 12 is a long corridor that runs esstwards through the 1926 Ho'6puloa lava Flow. The western boundary begins m the southern terminus of Honomalino Drive. The eastern boundary is approximately 8,000 feet west of the current project boundary. Little or no vegetation exists in this lava field. Near the northern and of Transect 12, at an elevation of 2,800 feet, is a well and reservoir site. No archaeological resources were encountered along the minister or at the well and reservoir site. Transect 13 Tmnsect 13 begins at the 2,680 foot contour level of Transect 12 and Ones perpendicular west to Ala Palma Lane, a din road. The vegetation consists of partially open grassland interspersed with 'ohi'a, 9""'hapu'u, and various grasses (on the "Stem side of the project corridor), and lauhale and hap.' ferm (on the eastern side). No archaeological resourcee were encountered at the well and reservoir site or along the reassert Transect 14 This is an L-shaped tratsect that begin. at the eastern and of Ala Malian Lane. It Huss north for about 575 feet, and then inns east for about 1,550 feet, Primarily along a some boundary wall (described below). Vegetation along this tmnsect consists of 'okra, Christmas-berry,ava gum, thimbleberry, and various vines and grasses. Portions of the corridor have been disturbed by Previoua, although net recent, bulldozer and other earth -moving activity. Site 2363-9 This site is a boundary wall, well stacked, cone -filled, and faced in places, running east approximately 1,450 feet along the corridor. It is 0.60-0.90 meters wide, is stacked five to seven courses high, and its height ranges from 0.50 in to 1.20 in. It is composed of 'a'a stones from 0.10 to 0.60 in in diameter, with the larger stones at the base. It is partially tumbled in some places, and some side portions are vertical while others are slightly sloped. This wall may be a boundary wall between the ah.pua'a ofPepa la and Pape 2"a. At its eastern terminus, the wall ends, and only a barbed -wive fence marks the boundary m the end of the project corridor. CONCLUDING ASSESSMENT A 100% survey was undertaken within well and maervou sites and 50-foot-wide pipeline corridors located on both sides of numerous roads. The ground visibility was fair to nxcellem, with moat areas being good to excellent Areas where visibility was the most difficult was in dense 'ohi'a, which formed an IM verstury that permitted view underneath. In grasslands, pasturelands, yards, mixed pastmeland/'ohi'a, and on a a lava visibility was generally good to excellent. The findings of previous research indicated that any of the following arehaeological features could be Present in the current project area: C- and L-shapes, enclosures, platfomu, terraces, calms, mounds, pahoehoe excavations, wells, overhangs, lava sinkholes, caves, robes, pits, and aligmnente. During the emreut assessment survey, walls, enclosures, cairns, and mounds were identified. Tentative functional interpretations for the sites include marker, temporary habitation, boundary, and burial. The prehistoric remains eeconatered consist of sites and features documenting low-inteusity, traditional native Hawaiian dryland agricultural use and associated temporary, or short -tents, w permanent residential habitation. These findings correlate well with the findings of previous surveys in the general area (e.g, Rosendahl 1983, Ileum and Walker 1988), where temporary and permanent habitations were recorded. An example of this is the cuaemly identified Site 2363-3, a habitation enclosure that was probably utilized into the historic period. The presence of such an enclosure -correlates well with historic documentation that notes that (according to informants) "primary residences were situated close in the ala loa (near the present-day Belt Highway)" (Maly 2000:4). Based on current findings and on previous archaeological and historical research, it is probable that prior to the historic mass disturbances in the general vicinity, other prehistoric archaeological features such as tansees, platforms, C- and Lshapes may have once existed along the pipeline corridor or in the general vicinity. The historic features in the project area consist of numerous boundary walls that functioned for animal control, or boundary walls between plots of land. Site 2363-1 probably served as boundary walls between plots of land. Site 2363-7 may have served either furtction. Other historic features noted during the survey included the mounds and enclosures at Site 2363-3, and Site 2363-8, consisting of marker cairns, a fence, and an adjacent old road Concerning site distribution, five of the sites (2363-1 through -5) were in Papa 2, one in Ho'opuloa (2363-0, one in Anspuka (2363-7), and one in Okae 1, 2 (2363-8)..Only one site (2363-7) is within a known Land Grant (LG 3199). This wan is typical of the stone walls built to demarcate agricultural land boundaries or to keep cattle in or out of certain areas. Concerning project area Endings relative to the overall settlement pattern for the vicinity, comparisons cannot be clearly made since the current project involved exploring only rabboo-like stretches of land. In general, however, the findings were as anticipated based on previous archaeological and documammy evidence. TENTATIVE GENERAL SIGNIFICANCE ASSESSMENTS AND RECOMMENDED GENERAL TREATMENTS Tentative assessments and recommended general treatments for sites identified during this assessment survey are summarized in Table 3. Significance categories used in the site evaluation process are based on Chapter 284: Roles Governing P—ad res for Hhmric Preservation Review to C ment on Chapter 69- 42, Hawaii Revised Statutes, Hawaii Administrative Rules; Tine 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources; Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Division Rules (December 2003). The DLNR-SHPD was these criteria for evaluating cultural resources. Sites were assessed for integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and sssociatioli and in terns of the following criteria: (1) Criterion A. Be associated with events that have made an important contribution to the broad parems of— history; B-4 / 15 (2) Criterion B. Be associated with the lives ofpersons important in am post; (3) Criterion C. Embody the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction; represent the work ofa toaster; or posaess high artistic value; Table 3. Summary of Temative General Slgntlicance Assessments and Rea .nA.d A.. ml r..... ��®��asa©aaoaa ���asaoaoaaa �>•asaoa©saes �>•�am��fre�ass000sa© ���asaos©aaa �a>•�asa©aoaaa ����'�asaosaoaa ��ssao©oa�o' �®�+-�ssaoaaoaa � a oaaoaoe ee �����aaaoaoaaa - Gnnal Slraihceare (megon¢. A = kopwmm rer hnwrzo1mm16Won m 4p#kmt erc,m andlor broad pmmmr orh1e, a = hnpartant for aaarNtlan wah Uro Wu erhnpwmnt Ndhmaaa In hinory C= Erceaaa —Pk orsae ope at b-A region ibM, gates, or Nwonal level o = Impaum hr �K aaaNa mamas E • Cuf *d sigN( Tenfathe Rxammend<d Gcrem1 ireatmena: FOC=lvMa dam mlbraon nemssary (hmikd remNMg, sum ma:rnam; paua,ir wmeque,a data raoverylmbgaaan N (uMrer work a(orry kimlaxvrary, saflpmt ems mreaed, rat pmxnacan pmrnda' PID = Rererwam with xme krNa(kaerpraFe dewapment rccammaMed (incbdNg eppmprime related data recorsry wank) fAl ^ Pteservadan "m a"W0 no runhr work (rod passage NrluNen Nro bndreapNgl, o-passibh mNimal (abler data collmbn a:awy (4) Criterion D. Have yielded, or is likely to yield, information important for research on prehistory or history; (5) Criterion E. Have an important traditional cultural value to the native Hawaiian people or to another ethnic group of the state due to associations with traditional cultural practices, beliefs, events or oral accounts. Recommendations Several sites are recommended for further work if they cannot be avoided by placement of the waterline elsewhere. These are Sites 2363-2, -3, -4, -6, -8, and -9. It is recommended the sites undergo archaeological inventory -level work in the form of further data collection. The basic purpose of an inventory survey would be to identify and adequately document an sites and features of potential archaeological significance present within the project area inventory work consists of detailed recording of sites and features, surface artifact and midden collections, and selected test excavations. The survey documents the nature and variety of archaeological remains present, and the distribution and density of such remains, and eveduams the potential general significance of the remains and the possible imp" of proposed development upon the remains. Finally, it permits a significance assessment of the archaeological reswmes, and facilitates formulation of realistic recommendations and estimates for any subsequent mitigation work that might be necessary. Based on the current findings, it is anticipated that after the work in the project area is will have heel completed, all of the information content m the identified sites will have been adequately collected, and PHRI would recorunend no further archaeological work, other than long-term CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT preservation of burials. This is stated with the qualification that there is always the possibility, however remote, that further unanticipated archaeological remains could be identified during inventory -level or other Brmre investigations. _ PURPOSE, BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES I The purpose of this cultural impact assessment is to comply with the rcquiremenrs of Chapter 343 Site Specific Recommended Tasks (Haw. Rev. Stat.), as amended by H.B. No.2895 H.D. 1 of the Hawai'i State Legislature (2000) and approved by the Govemor se Act 50 on April 26, 2000, and which an—g other things requires that The fallowing are inventory -level tasks recommended for each she/feature identified: nvironmenml assessments (EA) and covireamered impact statements (EIS) identify, and assess the potential effects of any proposed project upon the "...cultural practices of the community and Staft.. _" Sites 2363-1, 2363-5, and 2363.7 are boundary walls that have been recorded m I Chapter 343 (H . Rai. Stet) was amended by the State legislature because of the perceived need to a level sufficient to mitigate their research pomndek and no further work is assure that the environmental review process explicitly addressed the potential effects of any proposed "....Hawai'i's recommended. project upon culture, and traditional and custom tr." Guidelines customary rights." previously prepared and adopted by the State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) (1997) provide compliance Site 2363-2. Clearing of vegetation at the feature, detailed recording, guidance. Both Act 50 and the OEQC Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts mandate consideration of and placement g P of a 1.0 x 1.0 m excavation wit all the different groups comprising the multi -ethnic community of Hawaii. This inclusiveness, however, is generally understated, and the emphasis - as indicated by a background review (see below) of the cultural Site 2363-3 impact assessment issue, and me intent and evolution of both the legislative action and the guidelines - is Feature A. Detailed recording of the three mounds and dismantling to clearly meant to be primarily upon aspects of Native Hawaiian culture, particularly traditional and determine presence/absance ofhummr skeletal remains. customary access and use right. I Feature B. Detailed recmding and of tuna to fora I.0 Cultural IV Cultural resources include a broad range of often overlapping categories of cultural items - places, piacemwt x 1.0 in test wits. values, beliefs, objects, records, stories, and so on. A haditional cultural property C CCP") is one specific type of cultural resource that falls within the purview of the historic preservation review process. A Feature C. Detailed recording and placement of two to four 1.0 x 1.0 m `TCP" is a historic property or place that is important because it possesses "traditional cultural test units. significance": determine Feature D. Detailed recording ofoae mound, and dismantling tomm Traditional" in this context refers to those beliefs, customs, and practices of a living presence/ absence of human skeletal remains, ounity of people that have been pawed down through the generations, usually orallythrough or g practice. The traditional cultural significance of a historic property, Feature & Detailed recording, then, is significance derived from the role the property plays in a community's historically rooted beliefs, customs, and practices... General. In addition, it is recommended that any portions of the sift beyond the 50-foot corridor undergo detailed recording. traditional cultural property, then, can be defined generally as one that is ...(impormnt(significant)...became of its association with culmml practices or Site 2363-. Detailed recording, beliefs of a living community that (a) are rooted in that community's history, and (b) ere important in maintaining the continuing culmml identity of the community Site 2363-6. Detailed recording of mound and disman0ing todetermine (Pa rker and King 1990:1). presence/absence of human skeletal remains. In addition, it is important to realize that sometimes a traditional cultural property may not have a Site 2363.8. Detailed recording. visible physical manifestation: Site 2363.9. Detailed recording. Although many traditional cultural properties have physical manifestations that anyone walking across the surface of the earth can see, others do not have this kind of visibility, and more, important, the meaning, the historical importance of most traditional cultural properties can only be evaluated in terms of the oral history of the community (Sebastian 1993:22). 26 27 B-4 / 16 Theare at least two significant differences that distinguish traditional cultural properties as a subset wiThem thin the larger sphere of cultural resources. First, while cultural resources such as practices and beliefs may be spatially associated with general types of geographical areas, such as the exposed lava lands of the Keahole Point area, a traditional cultural property is a specific physical entity or feature with a definable boundary, such as a specific location within the current project site. Second, while cultural resources such as practices and beliefs can include general cultural behaviors such as the gathering of various natural resources for general subsistence, industrial, or ceremonial uses, a traditional cultural property is a specific place or feature directly associated with specific behaviors the continuity of which over time, in either actual practice or remembrance, can be demonstrated. Based on these two significant distinctions, it is possible m suggest three types of practitioner claims rotating to cultural practices, beliefs, and features tiat are likely to be encountered in the course of conducting a cultural impact assessment study. These claims can be referred to as (a) traditional cultural property claims, (b) traditional and customary cultural practice claims, and (c) contemporary or ime- traditional cultural practice claims. Traditional cultural property claims would be those that lie within the purview of the cunent historic preservation review process (DLNR 2002a,b); that is, they are claims involving the traditional practices and beliefs of a local ethnic community or members of that community that (a) are associated with a definable physical property (an entity such as a site, building, structure, object, or district), (b) are founded in the history of the local community, (c) contribute to the maintenance of the cultural identity of the community, and (d) demonstrate a historical continuity of practice or belief up to the present, through either actual practice or historical documentation. Furthermore, to qualify as a legitimate traditional cultural property within the historic preservation conm it, a potential traditional cultural property must be able to demonstrate its historical significance in terms of established evaluation criteria, such as those of the National Register of Historic, Places and/or the Hawapi Register of Historic Places. Traditional and customs interim practice laims would be those native Hawaiian claims that lie within the purview of Article XII, Section 7, of the Hawaii Sate Constitution ("Traditional and Customary Rights'), and various other some laws and court mlings, particularly as reaffirmed in 1995 by the Hawaii State Supreme Court in die decision commonly ref d to as the "PASH decision," and m further clarified more recently in its 1998 decision in State of Hawaii v. Alaoa`i Hanani and its 2000 decision in Kp Pnakai o Ka 'Ama at al. v. land We on Sate of Hawai ' or al The notable points of the decisions in PASH and in Hanani can be summarized as follows: (a) the reasonable exercise of ancient Hawaiian usage is entitled in protection under Article XI1, Section 7 of the Hawd' i State Constitution; and (b) those persons claiming their conduct is constitutionally protected most pmve that they are a native Hawaiian as defined in PASH. that the claimed right is constitutionally prommed as a traditional or customary native Hawaiian practice, and That the exercise of the right is occurring on undeveloped or less than fully developed property. Ka Pa'akai generally reaffirms the same points as in the PASH and Hansel decisions and, in addition, (a) indicates the explicit responsibility of the regulatory agency involved in any application review to arrive at affirmative and substantive conclusions regarding potential impact upon traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural practices and resources, and (b) suggests an "analytical framework" for the identification of and potential impacts upon any such cultural practices and resources. Traditional native Hawaiian cultural practices can be categorized as two general types: (a) practices with active behaviors involving both observable activities with material results and their inherent values or beliefs; and (b) practices with more passive behaviors that seek to produce non -material results. Practices with active behaviors, for example, would involve practices like the gathering and collecting of different animal and plant resources for various purposes, such as subsistence, medicinal, statement, social, and ceremonial and possibly other uses. Uses such as these usually have associated beliefs and values B-4 / 17 (both explicit and implicit) relating m a pervasive general theme that flows throughout traditional native Hawaiian culture and binds it together. To native Hawaiians, the natural elements of the physical environment - the lard, sea, water, winds, rains, plants, and animals, and their various embodied spiritual aspects - comprise the very inundation of all cultural life and activity - subsistence, social, and ceremonial; tu native Hawaiians, the relationship with these nmural elements is one of family and kinship. Practices with more passive behaviors involves more experiential activities focused not "communing with nature'; that is, behaviors relating to spiritual communication and interaction that resffnm and reinforce familial and kinship relationships with the lateral environment. While traditional cultural property claims, as defined above, would certainly fell within the general domain of traditional and customary cultural practice claims, net all traditional and customary cultural practice claims would necessarily qualify as traditional cultural property claims. Traditional and customary cultural practice claims subsume a broad range of cultural practices and beliefs associated with a general geographical area or region, rather than a clearly definable property or site. For example, the gathering of marine tes from along a section of shoreline for haditonal subsistence or ceremonial purposes, in eontrastto the gathering of a specific marine resource species for a specific use by current generation members of a family that had obtained the same resource from the same recognized site for several generations. Contemporary. or "neo-traditional" cultural practice claims overlap with neither traditional property claims nor traditional and customary practice claims. Contemporary cultural practice claims would be those made by whoual practitioners relating to current practices or beliefs for which no clear specific historical basis in traditional culture can be clearly establishedordemonstrated; for example, be conducting of ritual ceremonies of uncertain authenticity at sites or features for which no such prior use can be demonstrated. The specific purpose of the present cultural impact assessment study is to assess the potential impacts of the proposed project upon the cultural resources - the practices, fountains and/or beliefs - of native Hawaiians or any other ethnic group that might be associated with project area To accomplish this purpose, several specific objectives were established: - 1. Identify any native Hawaiian or other ethnic group cultural practices currently being. conducted by individual cultural practitioners or groups; 2. Collect sufficient information an as to define the general nature, location, and authenticity of any identified outmost practices; 3. Assess the potential impacts of the proposed Project upon identified cultural practices; and 4. Recommend appropriate mitigation measures for any potentially adverse impacts upon identified cultural practices. Thus, the overall goal or objective of the present cultural impact assessment study was to identify any native Hawaiian or other cultural practices currently being conducted within or immediately adjacent to present project stea that might potentially be in some manner constrained, restricted, prohibited, or eliminated if the proposed p ject were he be approved. The types of practices to be identified would be inclusive; that is, claims for all tares types of practices - traditional cultural property, traditional and customary cultuml practices, and contemporary cultural practices - would be Identified and considered. More specifically, the objectives of the cultural impact assessmem were to determine the following: (a) if the project area is currently being arceseed by native Hawaiian cultural practitioners for any traditional and customary cultural uses; (b) if the proposed project would have any adverse impacts upon any identified meat native Hawaiian cultural uses of the area; Sold (c) what measures might be proposed to mitigate any adverse impacts the proposed poject might have upon Say identified current native Hawaiian uses of the CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT AND OEQC GUIDELINES As indicated previously, the general purpose of this cultural impact assessment is to asseu the Potential impacts of the proposed project on any identified cultural resources in compliance with the requirements of Chapter 343 (H . Rev. Sint). To understand the cultural impact ausssmenr issue, particularly m it is addressed by the present study, a summary review of the intent and evolution of the OEQC guidelines is necessary. The guidelines evolved out of what are commonly referred to as "PASH/Kohanaiki" issues - issues relating to native Hawaiian traditional and entomary access and land use rights as they were reasserted by a State Supreme Court decision in August 1995 and further clarified in its 1998 decision in State v. Hann - and the need for appropriate means to address these issues within the State environmental impact review process. For a good discussion of the issues and options involved, the "Repon on Native Hawaiian Traditional and Customary Practices Following the Opinion of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii in Public Access Shoreline Hawai'i v. Hawaii County Planning Commission" prepared by the PASH/Kohanaiki Study Group (1998) should be consulted. Initial attempts to address various issues relating to native Hawaiian traditional add customary access and land we rights within the framework of the State environmental impact review process were made in the form of proposed changes to the State EIS law as contained in Chapter 343 (How. Rev. Sint). Than attempts to require a formal cultural impact assessment failed to pus the State legislature in 1996 and 1997. A subsequent, second attempt to address various issues relating to native Hawaiian traditional and customary access and land use rights was made in th, form of proposed changes in the "Administrative Rules" for compliance with Chapter 343 (DOH Title 11, Chapter 200). This attempt to require an explicitly defined cultural impact assessment also failed, as the governor declined to approve the proposed amendments. The third attempt to address various issues relating to native Hawaiian traditional and customary access and land we rights within the State environmental impact review process resulted in the cui ent OEQC "Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts" (OEQC 1997b). Draft guidelines were initially issued for public review and comment on September 8, 1907. The Environmental Council formally adopted the guidelines in their final form on November 19, 1997. The relationship of the OEQC guidelines to the State Supreme Court'TASH decisiod' was clearly stated on the front page of the September 8, 1997 issue of the OEQC bulletin, "the E ironmenwl Nonce," .hen the draft guidelines were first issued for public review and comment, as follows: For years, a controversy has simmered over developers' responibility, to perform a "Culmal Impact Study" prior to building a project. The recent Supreme Court 'TASE" decision milffirmed the state's duty to protect the gathering rights of native Hawaiian. In light of there events, the Environmental Council has drafted a guidance document to provide clarity on when and how to assess a pmjeet's impacts on the cultural practices o£hnt communities. B-4 / 18 It should be noted that the guidelines for cultural impact assessment are meant tu include consideration of all the different groups comprising the multi -ethnic community of Hawaii; however, this inclusiveness is generally understated, and the clew emphasis is meant to be upon aspects of native Hawaiian culture. More than 20 letters were received by OEQC in response to the publication of the draft guidelines, and relevant comments were said to have been incorpnaated into a final version of the guidelines (OEQC rid.). The Environmental Council formally adopted the final guidelines (OEQC 1997b) on November 19, 1997. The final guidelines are virtually identical to the draft guidelines initially published em September 8, 1997, and the degree to which any of the received comments on the draft guidelines were considered prior to issuance of the final guidelines is uncertain. in f t, the overall process through which the guidelines were prepared and adopted brings out several important questions relating to such topics as (a) the source Or basis utilized for the content of the guidelines, (b) the background and qualification of the prepares(s) of the guidelines, (c) the criteria to be used for the adequacy of cultural impact assessment Studies prepared in response to the guidelines, and (d) the legal question ofhow compliance can be required when the standards are guidelines. According to the Chair's Report contained in The 1997 Annual Report of the Environmental Council, the Cultural Impacts Committee drafted the guidelines: The Committee drafted guidelines recommending a methodology to assess rite impact ofproposed actions on cultural resources, including Native Hawaiian cultural re-orreS, values, and beliefs. The guidelines also specify the contents of a cultural impact assessment To prepare the Guidelines, the Committee reviewed public testimony and solicited input from interested parties. Expertise from the DLNR'S Historic Preservation Division as wail as Federal regulations governing the "Protection of Historic Properties" were used to model the draft guidelines. The draft culmml impact guidelines were published for review and comment in the Sept. 8 Environmental Nonce, and over 20 letters were received. Relevant comments. were incorporated into a final draft version of the guidelines, which were adopted as a policy document by the Environmental Council on November 19, 1997 (OEQC n.d.:5). Direct inquiries to OEQC (Gary Gill, then -Director) and SHPD (Du Holly McEldoamey, then -Staff Specialist in the History and Culture Branch) provided additional background information relating to the formulation of the cultural impact assessment guidelines. The principal author or compiler of the guidelines was Arnold Lam, Esq.,a member of the Environmental Council's Cultural impacts Committee. Mr. Lum as also a Staff attorney at the Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation. OEQC staff also assisted in the preparation of the guidelines. Several internal drafts were prepared, reviewed, and revised. Preparation of the guidelines retied to some degree upon National Register Bulletin No. 38, Guidelines f-Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Culural Properties (Parker and King 1990) for basic content information. Other sources, including the SHPD draft mles for conducting ethnographic surveys and dealing with traditional cultural properties (DLNR nA.), were consulted; in fact, a copy of the SHPD draft rules was provided to OEQC and the Cultural Impacts Committee by then-SHPD Administrator, Dr. Don Hibbard. Professional staff in the SHPD-History and Culture Branch took part in the preparation and review of the guidelines. Certainly the inclusion of such professional anthropological and historical expertise in the preparation of the guidelines was appropriate; however, much of the professional advice on the extent to which derailed expectations -regarding study scope, content, methodology, documentation, and impact assessment -should be explicitly addressed in the guidelines was apparently discounted. The most recent attempt to address various issues relating to native Hawaiian traditional and customary access and land use rights within the State envvanmemal impact review process resulted in the amendment to Chapter 343 (How. Rev. Sort). as amended by H.B. No.2895, H.D,1 of the Hawaii State Legislature (2000) and approved by the Governor as Act 50 on April 26, 2000. While no specific administrative tales for the implementation of this amendment have been adopted, it is generally accepted that the Guidelines previously prepared and adopted by the OEQC (1997) are meant to provide general compliance guidance. The OEQC Guidelines consist of three basic sections. The first section is an introduction that notes the various statutory and other bases for addressing potential impacts upon cultural resources within the context of the environmental assessment review process, and "...encourages preparers of environmental assessments and enviroomental impact statements to analyze the impact of a proposed action on cultural practices and features associated with the project area' (OEQC 1997:1). The second section of the guidelines discusses methodological considerations for conducting cultural impact assessments, and presents a recommended six -step protocol in be followed by the assessment preparers. The third section of the guidelines outlines eleven topics or "matters' that a cultural assessment should address; these topics basically represent the desired content and organization of a cultural impact assessment report. As "guideliues," the OEQC Guideline would seem to have neither the specific statutory authority of law, nor the regulatory authority of administrative rules. As guidelines, they can be regarded as providing general guidance; that is, they represent general suggestions and recommendations as to how to approach the assessment of potential cultural impacts. The guidelines provide little or no guidance relative to many important questions, perhaps the most significant ofwhich would be the following: 1. How would project -specific determinations be made as to whether or not a cultural impact assessment study might even be necessary or appropriate — given the specific nature and location of a proposed project; 2. If a cultural impact assessment study is to be conducted, how does one determine what constitutes an appropriate project -specific level of effort — that is, the general scope of work or objectives for the study, acid the specific tasks or activities required in accomplish successfully the scope ofwork or objectives; 3. What criteria are to be used for determining the credibility and reliability of potential cultural information sources (generally referred to as `informants" or "knowledgeable individuals'); 4. If specific cultural practices, beliefs, or features are definitely identified as being associated with a project area, what criteria are to be applied for evaluating (a) the descriptive adequacy, and (b) the cultural authenticity of the identified practices, beliefs, or features; 5. If specific eulanrolly authentic practices, beliefs, or features are def itely identified as being associated with a project area, what criteria are to be used for assessing the nature and extent of potential impacts of a proposed project on the identified practices, beliefs, or features — that is, "m effect, "'no adverse effect," or "adverse effect;" 6. Ifs project is determined to have potentially adverse impacts upon specific identified culturally authentic practices, beliefs, m features, what criteria are to be used for evaluating the adequacy and appropriateness of alternative potential mitigation actions; 32 B-4 / 19 7. Within the purview of what regulatory office or agency would the review and acceptance or rejection of a completed cultural impact assessment study legitimately fall; and 8. What standards or criteria are to be used to evaluote the overall adequacy or acceptability of a completed cultural impact assessment study? Consideration of these questions and their implications is directly relevant to the present cultural impact assessment study. These implications relate most importantly to (a) the level of study effort believed appropriate for the p ject specific context, and (b) the rationale adopted for both the study overall, as well w for the identification and evaluation of any identified cultural practice claims, the assessment of potential project -speck impacts, and the formulation of any specific recommendations for further sandy or other mitigation actions. BASIC GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS Several references are available to serve as basic guidance documents far carrying out cultural impact assessment studies ofvarious scopes and intensities. The principal sources ere the following: L The OEQC Guidelines for Assessing Cultural impacts (OEQC 1997); 2. The Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook (MacKenzie 1991), and more specifically the discussions of traditional and customary rights contained in the two chapters on access rights (Lucas 199Is) and gathering rights (Lucas 1991b); 3. The Report an Native Hawaiian Traditional and Customary Practices Following the Opinion of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawaii in Public Access Shoreline Hawaii v. Hawaii County Planning Commission prepared by the 2A5HIKohanaiki Sandy Group (1998); 4. The text of several relevant decisions of the Hawaii Supreme Court, including the decision commonly referred to es the "DASH decision" (1995), and the more recent decisions in State of Hawaii v Alma`i Hsnaoi (1998) and Ka Pa`akai a Ka'Aina et at, v. Land Use Commission_ State of Hawai" m al (2000); 5. The federal regulations of the Advisory Council an Historic Preservation far the National Register of Historic Places (Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] 1981) and the Protection of Historic Properties (CPR 1986); 6. Nationat Register Bulletin No. 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties (Parker and King 1990); and 7. Current approved versions of the SHPD administrative roles (effective December 11, 2003), including Chapter 275: Rules Governing Procedures for Historic Preservation Review for Governmental Projects Covered Under Sections 6E-7 and 6E-8, HRS (DLNR 2003a), and Chapter 284: Rules Governing Procedures for Historic Preservation Review to Comment on Chapter 6E-42, BRS, Projects (2003b), as well w on earlier draft Chapter 284 - Rules Governing Procedures fur Ethnographic Inventory Surveys, Treatment of Traditional Cultural Properties, and Historical Data Recovery (DLNR n.d.). 33 While the general nature and content of the first four referenced sources are self-explanatory, further comment should be made regarding the final three items. In the absence of any formally adopted administrative rule specifically addressing the treatment of traditional cultural properties, SHPD currently utithms National Register Bulletin No. 38, Guidelines for Evaluating and Doemseafing Traditional Cultural Properties (Parker and King 199% as its principal source of guidance for reviewing and evaluating the adequacy and acceptability of traditional cultural property study reports prepared in connection with various permit applications for which SHPD regulatory review is required. Bulletin No. 38 provides detailed guidance for the assessment of traditional cultural properties within the framework of the National Register significance criteria evaluation process (National Park Service 1990). The SHPD draft administrative rule relating m ethnographic au—ya and traditional cultural properties (DLNR n.d.) has existed in finalized draft version since at least early 1997; however, it has never been circulated openly, much less formally provided for public review, comment, and eventual adoption by the DLNR. This situation is uuformnate because the draft role goes well beyond National Register Bulletin No. 38 in providing detailed guidance for conducting traditional cultural property studies, and mom specifically for dealing with the identification, evaluation, and documentation of native Hawaiian traditional cultural properties and their associated cultural practices and beliefs. In the absence of any formally adopted administrative rate specifically addressing the treatment of traditional cultural properties, SHPD can also be said to basically follow the federal regulations of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation for guidance in the evaluation of significance - as contained in Section 60.4 ("Criteria for evaluation") of the "National Register of Historic Places" (CFR 1981), and for guidance in the assessment of potential effects - as contained in Section 800.9 ("Criteria of affect and adverse effect") of the "Protection of Historic Properties' (CFR 1986). PRESENT STUDY SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY The study scope and methodology utilized by PHRI for many previous cultural impact assessment studies (e.g., PHRI 1999; 2001a, b, c, d; 2002a, b; c; 2004) has always been based on the general assumption that the level of study effort appropriate in any project-Speeific context should involve the consideration of several key factors: (a) the probable number and significance of known or suspected cultural properties, f tares, practices, or beliefs within or associated with the specific project area; (b) the potential number of individuals (potential informants) with cultural knowledge of the specific project area; (c) the availability of historical and cultural information on the specific project area or immediately adjacent lands; (d) the physical size, configuration, and natural and human modification history of the specific project area; and (a) the potential effects of the project on knowo or expected cultural properties, features, practices, or beliefs within or related to the specific project area, Consideration of these factors within the nature and context of any specific project, as well as prior general consultations with professional staff in SHPD, often indicated that the most appropriate level of study for an adequate assessment of potential cultural impacts was a relatively limited or abbreviated assessment study. Based on the location, small size, and the extensive recant historic period modification, development and utilization of the project site, this smdy assumes that: (a) potential cultural impact assessment issues would be highly unlikely, (b) the negative results of the archaeological reconnausanre survey conducted for the project would confirm both the greatly altered physical nature of the project area and the absence of cultural resources within or related to the project area, and (c) in the unlikely instance that any legitimate cultural impact assessment issues should arise during the environmental review period, they could be addressed adequately within the framework of the review process (e.g., from Draft to Final Environmental Impact Statement). B-4 / 20 Consideration ofthese factors within the name and context ofany specific project usually indicated that the relatively greater levels ofstudy effort that can be characteraed m identification or documentation studies would be inappropriate and excessive. The distinctive characteristics of as identification study are that it would be restricted to: (a) the identification of native Hawaiian or other ethnic group cultural practices, beliefs, properties, features, or exploitable normal resources associated with and/or present within or related to the speck project area that are currently being conducted by and/or known to individual cultural practitioners or groups; and (b) the collection of information reasonably sufficient so as to define the general nature, location, and likely authenticity of identified cultural claims. An identification study would not involve the considerably greater level of smdy effort - both calendar months and hours of labor - needed to tarty out a full documentation study. The distinctive characteristics of the latter, which would commonly be referred to as a full ethnographic or oral history study, would be: (a) the collection of detailed information regarding identified native Hawaiian or other ethnic group cultural practices by means of formal oral history interviews which are usually tape recorded and transcribed; and (b) the analysis and synthesis of all collected date - from interviews, as well as relevant historical documentary and archival research - within the general cultural -historical context of traditional native Hawaiian or other ethnic group culture and the defined specific geographical area of a specific project The overall nationals guiding limited assessment studies has been that the level of study effort should be commensurate with the potential of the proposed project for making any adverse impacts upon any native Hawaiian or other ethnic group cultural practices correctly conducted by cultural practitioners within the project area. Such studies are believed to comprise a reasonable approach for the assessment of potential cultural impacts within a specific project area. The potential for any project to result in adverse impacts upon any current native Hawaiian or other ethnic group cultural practices, beliefs, or features would often seem most likely to be minimal or indstemairms that is, given the past land use history of a project area and the general nature and scope of a proposed project, it was very unlikely that the continued exercise of any current practices would be in any way constrained, restricted, prohibited, or eliminated. The present assessment smdy, however, has adopted a somewhat different approach. As indicated previously, in 1995 the Hawai'i State Supreme Court, in the decision commonly referred to as the "PASH decision, reaffirmed those native Hawaiian traditional and customary cultural practice rights which lie within the purview of Article MI, Section 7, of the Hawapi State Constitution ('7mditional and Customary Rights) and venous other state laws and court ratings. The court further clarified these rights in its 1998 decision in State of Hnwai'i v. Alaoa" Hanaoi and its 2000 decision in Ka Pa'akai o Ka 'Aim et al, v. Land Use Commission, State of Hi -wait t I The present assessment study has adopted as its basic methodological approach, the suggested "analytical framework" which is presented in Section Ill. B. 2, of the Supreme Court's amended £tidings of ft and conclusions of law in its 2000 decision in Ka Pa'akai o Ka 'Area et al v Land U C 'ore State f H ' m al The basic steps of this analytical framework, as adapted Gum the Court's decision, may be summarized as follows: 1. Identify the nature and scope of any 'valued cultural, historical, or natural resources' that might be present within the area of the proposed project, including which - if any - traditional and customary native Hawaii= cultural access and use rights are h,u g exercised; 2. Determine the extent to which - if at all -airy such identified 'valued cultural, historical, or natural resources' might be impacted by the proposed project; and 3. Determine feasible actions - if my - might be taken to mitigate any potentially adverse project impacts and thereby protect any traditional and cusomary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights are tieing examised. The use of this methodological approach is believed to be both appropriate and justified for the puiu m assessment study for several reasons, specifically: (a) the specific nature of the project area overall; and N the very minimal nano and area ofdimct project impacts. The present cultural impact assessment study is based primarily on four sources of information: (a) die preliminary feasibility study for the project (Belt Collins Hawaii Ltd. at al. 2003); (b) observations and findings of the archaeological rise meet survey fieldwork conducted for the present report; (c) fieldwork findings of project botany and biology consultants (A. Whistler, R. David; personal communications); and (d) limited contacts made with island residents thought possibly to have any relevant knowledge. Given consideration of the current land uses and the extent of historic period modification within the overall project area, m well as the minimal destructive nature of the proposed mfirestmcture development, only minimal effort was made to contact potential local informants regarding the project area. FINDINGS 1. Identify the nature and scope of any 'valued cultural, historical, or natural resources' that might be present within the area of the proposed project, including which - if any - traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights are being exercised In semis of ci n mint land use within the approximately 15,000-acre overall project area, about 12,000 acres (80%) are in agricultural use, with the remaining approximately 3,000 acres (20%) comprising unused land and forest reserve. The major agricultural uses are primarily for orchards - macadamia nuts, coffee, and various tropical fruits, and for livestock (cattle) grazing. Future agricultural use expansion is - anticipated to be mainly for coffee and vanom tropical fruits (Belt Collins Hawaii, Lid. et al. 2003:5-6). Within the small areas of unused land and forest reserve, several species of native vegetation that were traditionally used by native Hawaiians for a variety of cultural purposes were noted to be present in scattered distribution, including lokut (Ateurttes molucanna), kr' (Ga dytine terminals), 'ehi'a (Menwidercus sp.), and hapu'u (Ciborium splendens). None of these species are raze or endangered, and all are readily available in many areas outside of the present project area No other plants or other naturcl resources believed of significant value were found. The review of prior archaeological work and historical documentary information done for the present archaeological assessment survey did not identify any significant cultural or historical sires known to be present within the overall project area. Furthermore the results of the archaeological assessment fieldwork indicated the limited presence, as anticipated, of the remains typical of traditional native Hawaiian occupation and historic period land use. No sites believed to be of significant cultural or historical value were found. - Finally, given the extent of historic period land modification and development - principally for agricultural use, and the paucity of both valued natural resources and significant sites, it follows that it is highly mlikely that any traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights are being exercised within the overall project area. 2. Determine the extent to which — if at all — any such identified 'valued cultural, historical, or natural resources' might be impacted by the proposed project B-4 / 21 Given that no cultural, historical, or natural resources of significant value were idrntifisd within the overall project area, it follows that it is highly unlikely that the proposed project could have any direct effects - adverse or otherwise - upon any such resources. Furthermore, given the minimally intrusive wrote of the infrastructure of the proposed project as envisioned - several small well and reservoir sires, and a distribution system of pipelines situated almost entirely along existing roadways - it follows that even if any cultural, historical, or natural resources of significant value were present somewhere within the overall project area, it would be highly mnlikely that the proposed project would have any direct effects - adverse or otherwise - upon any such resources. Finally, given the minimally intrusive nature of the infrastructure of the proposed project, it is believed that any heretofore unidentified traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights being exercised within the overall project area would not be adversely effected as they would in no way be limited or prevented by the proposed pmject(9 3. Determine feasible actions - if any - that might be taken to mitigate any Potentially adverse project impacts and thereby protect any traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights being exercised Given that no cultural, historical, or natural resources of significant value were identified within the overall project area, and that therefore it is highly unlikely that the proposed project could have any direct effects - adverse or otherwise - upon any such resources, it follows that no mitigation actions of any kind re necessary or appropriate in order to protect any traditional and customary native Hawaiian cultural access and use rights that are being exercised for any purposes, or by individuals of any other cultural affiliation for any traditional cultural purposes. CONCLUDING ASSESSMENT AND RECOMMENDATION The overall project area has been extensively modified and developed during historic times, as indicated by: (a) the extensive exisfing agricultural use of the [and; and (b) the findings of the archaeological assessment fieldwork done for the present project - which yielded only limited evidence of the presence of any cultural or historical praperam - either within or directly related to the overall project area. Furthermore, there is no indication of any kind that the overall project area has any natural resources necessary to or currently being used by either native Hawaiian cultural practitioners exercising traditional and customary access and use rights for any purposes or by individuals of any other cultural affiliation for any traditional cultural purposes. And finally, given the potential direct effects that might result fkum summally intrusive nature of the infrastructure of the proposed project m envisioned, even if any cultural, historical, or natural resources of significant value were present somewhere within the overall project me, it would be highly unlikely that the proposed project would have any direct effects - adverse or otherwise - upon any such resources. Based on the negative results of the recently completed archaeological assessment survey and the absence of any evidence that the overall project area is currently being used for any legitimate traditional cultural purposes by either native Hawaiian cultural practitioners o individuals of any other cultural affiliation, it can be concluded that the proposed project should have no significant effects - much less any adverse impacts - upon any valued cultural, historical, or natural resources within the overall project area, and that no mitigation actions of any kind are needed. Finally, it should be noted that in the unlikely instance that any legitimate cultural impact assessment issues should arise during the envismar ental review period, they could be addressed adequately within the framework of the review process (i.e., from draft to final environmental study). REFERENCES CITED Armstrong, R.W. (editor) 1983 Atlas afH aii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. (Second edition) Belt Collins Hawed, Ltd., with R. Bowen and K Fleming 2003 South Kona Irrigation System: Preliminary Feasibility Study. Prepared for U.S. Department of Agriculture - Natural Resources Conservation Service, and State of Hawaii - Department ofAgriculture. (December) CFR (US Code of Federal Regulations) 1981 36 CFR Part 60: National Register of Historic Places. (Including Part 60.4: Criteria for evaluation.) 1986 36 CFR Part 800: Protection of Historic Properties. (Including Part 800.9: Criteria of eHeer and adverse effect) Corbin, A.B. 2003a Archaeological Assessment Survey, Lot 5 - Kaohe Ranch Subdivision, Land of Kaohe 41° and 5'", South Kane Distric4 Island of Hawaii ('17MK:3-8-7-08:40). PHRI Letter Report 2348-062703. Prepared for Phil Davis, Phil Davis Architects. 2003b Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Seaward Portion of a 183-Acre Parcel, Magoon Ranch Oceanfront Property, Land of Pahoehoc 3rd, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-8-7-07:1). PHM Letter Report 7,260-07-23-03, Prepared for Roger Harris Planning Co. DLNR (Department of Land and Natural Resources, State of Hawar) 2003a Chapter 275: Rules Governing Procedures for Historic Preservation Review for Governmental Projects Covered Under Sections 6E-7 and 6E-8, HRS. Hawaii Administrative Rules; Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources; Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Division Rules. (Effective December 11, 2003) 2003b Chapter 284: Rules Governing Procedures for Historic Preservation Review m Comment on Chapter 6E-42, HRS, Projects. Hawaii Administrative Rules; Title 13, Depamnent of Land and Natural Resources; Subtitle 13, Stare Historic Preservation Division Rules. (Effective December 11, 2003) n.d. Chapter 284: Rules Governing Procedures for Ethnographic Inventory Surveys, Treatment of Traditional Cultural Properties, and Historical Data Recovery. Hawaii Administrative Rules; Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources; Subtitle 13, Stara Historic Preservation Division. (Draft mle; 1997) Handy, E.S.C., and E.G. Handy 1972. Native Planters in Old Hawaii: Then Life, Lore and Environment. B.P. Bishop Museum Bulletin 223. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu (With M.K. Puku) 1972b The Polynesian Family System in Ka'u. Yauvii. Rutland, Vermont: Charles Iz Tuttle Company. Heart, A.E., and A.T. Walker 1988 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Farms of Kapm Mauna Lauds Project Area, Land of Kapua, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 361-030288. Prepared for S.D.Z. Land Company. 38 B-4 / 22 Haun, A.E., and D. Henry 2004 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Land of Paheehoe 1, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii (TMK (3) 8-7-008:008). Haun & Associates. Prepared for Mr. Peter Dungan. Head, J.A., Rosendahl, P.H., and S.T. Goodfellow 1994 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Ka'che Subdivision. Lands of Ka'ohe 3rd, 4th, end 5th, South Kona District, Island ofHawai'i (TMK:3-8-7-08:Por.8). PHRI Report 1375-070994. Prepared for Allen Construction Company,. I`i, J.P. 1959 Fragment of Hawaiian History. Bishop M eum Special PublicaBon 70. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. Kamakau, S.M. 1961 Ruling Chiefs of Hawaii. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Lucas, P.N. 1991a Traditional and Customary Rights: Access Rights. In MacKenzie, ed, 1991:211-222. 1991b Traditional and Customary Rights: Gathering Rights. In MacKerme, ed, 1991: 223-228. MacKenzie, M.K. (editor) 1991 Native Hawaiian Rights Handbook. Honolulu: Native Hawaiian Legal Corporation and Office of Hawaiian Affairs Maly, K 2000 Overview of Historical Documentation for Lands of South Kona (Pahoehoe to Ka'ohe) Island of Hawaii. Karen Pon, Associates. Prepared f PHRI. OEQC (Office of Environmental Quality Controy State oPHawai'i) 1997 Guidelines for Assessing (Vernal Impacts- Adopted by the Environmental Council; November 19,1997. ad. Environmental Report Card, 1997: An Assessment of Hawaii's Environmental Health. The 1997 Asmual Rep,n ofthe Environmental Council, Scam of Hawaii. PHRI (Paul H. Rosendahl, Ph.D., I.e.) 1999 Cultural Impact Assessment Study: Native Hawaiian Cultural Practices, Features, and Beliefs Associated with the University ofHawed'i Mauna Kca Science Reserve Master Plan Project Area; University of Hawaii Mauna Kea Science Reserve Master Plan, Mauna Kea Science Reserve and Hale Pohaku; Lends of Ka'ohe (Hamakua District) and Humu'ula (Hilo District, Island of Hawaii. Technical Report for Environmental Impact Study. PHRI Report 1876-040199. Prepared for University of Hawaii— Institute for Astronomy. (August) 2001a Cultural Impact Assessment for Draft Environmental Impact Statement Hilton Hawaian Village Waikikion Project; Land of Waikiki, Honolulu (Kona) District, Island of O'ahu. PHRI Report 2156-061201. Prepared for Hilton Hotel, Corporation. (June) 2001b Cultural Impact Assessment for Eavirmemsem Assessment (EA): Tropical Ponds of Hawaii Aquaculture Farm Project; Land of Huslue 2° , North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. Prepared for Tropical Ponds of HawaiL (July) H2 2001c Cultural Impact Assessment Study: Native Hawaiian Cultural Practices and Beliefs Associated with Wa'ahila Ridge; HECO Kamoku-Pfikeie 138-kV Transmission Line Project Lands of Mimes, Paiute, and Waikiki; Honolulu (Kona) District, Island of Oahu. Technical Report for Environmental Impact Study. PHRI Report 1928- 04W99. Prepared for Hawadan Electric Company, Inc. (September) 2001d Cultural Impact Assessment Study: Ocean Bay Plantation at Haeama'ulu; Land of Hanama'ulu, Lihu'e District, Island of Kauai. Technical Report forEnvironmental Impact Statement. PHRI Report 2182-091501. Prepared far EWM Kauai, LUC. (December) 2002a CulturalImpact Assessment Study: HECO Waiau Fuel Pipeline Project; Stare Energy Corridor: Campbell Industrial Park to HECO's Waum Power Plant; 'Ewa Distdeq Island of O'ahu. PHRI Report 2224-121801. Prepared for Hawaiian Electne Company, Inc. (January) 2002b Cultural Impact Assessment Study: University of Hawaii at Hilo Student Life and Events Complex; Land of Waukee, South Hilo District, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report 2141-040102. Prepared for University of Hawaii. (May) 2002c Cultural Impact Assessment for Draft Environmental Assessment Wai'aha Production Well and Storage Tank Project; Land of Wai'aha 1" and 2n°, North Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. PHRI Report 2282-092402. Prepared for Planning Solutions, Inc. (September) 2004 Archaeological and Cultural Impact Assessment Study: HELCO Keahole Generating Station Project; Lands of Kalaae 1-4, North Kona District, Island of Hawai'i. PHRI Report 2330/2331-021504. Prepared for Hawaii Electric Light Company. (February) Parker, P.L., and T.F. Krug 1990 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. National Register Bulletin No. 38. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Dept. Interior, National Park Service. PASH/Kahanaiki Study Group 1998 Report on Native Hawaiian Traditional and Customary Practices Following the Opinion of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai'i in Public Access Shoreline Hawaii v. Hawai'i County Planning Commission. Prepared in Response to H. R No. 197, H.D. 1, Regular Session of 1997, Nineteenth State Legislature, State of Hawai'i. Submitted by the Office of Planning, State of Hawai i. (January) Reinecke, J.E. 1930 Survey of West Hawaiian Sites: From Kailm, Kona, m Kalahuipuaa, Kohala. Manuscript. Department of Anthropology, B.P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu. Rmendahl, P.H. 1983 Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Farms of Kepus Project Area, Land of Kapua, South Kona, Island of Hawaii. PHRI Report Ms. 73-120782. Prepared for Farms of Kapua, Ltd. Sato, H. H., W. Ikeda, It Path, R. Smythe, and M. Takehiro, Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii, State of Hawai'i. U.S. Department of Agriculture -Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agriculture Experiment Station. Governmem Printing Office, Washington, D.C. 40 B-4 / 23 Sebastian, L. 1993 Protecting Traditional Culture[ Properties through the Section 106 Process. CRM Vol. 16 (Special Issue): 22-26. StIva, C. 1983 Preliminary Historical Documemary Research: Fames of Kapm Project Area, Land of Kapua, South Kona, Island of Hawaii. In Ros-dahl1983. Soehren, L. J. 1980 Letter Report: Archaeological Reconnaissance on Parcels Identified by Tax Map Keys 8-7-19:38,39, and 40. Situated at Ka'ohe, South Kona, Hawai'i. Prepared for Mr. Thomas E. Counter, Land Use Services, Kailua-Kona, Hawaii. Spriggs, M. 1983 A Field Trip to the "Farms of Rapes" Property, Kspus, Kona, Hawaii Island. Department of Anthropology, University of Hawaii m Manue. Walsh, P.O., Chiogloji, R., Ballard, H., Robins, J., and H. Hammatt 1995 Archaeological Inventory Survey of a 29.8 acre parcel at Kukuiopae 2, South Kona, ialaud of Hawaii (TMK 8:7-10.11). Cultural Surveys Hawaii. Prepared for Stanley H. Rmluig. (Revised March) rE APPENDIX Selected Land Commission Awards Testimonies Native Testimony to the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles Translation in the Hawaii State Archives (1849) Information drawn from Mahele Database Waihona Was Corporation, Waihona.com Honomalino Ahupua a No. 8059, Hakuole 11040 N.R. 524-525v8 Here are my kihapais received from Lukebi - 1 kihapai of taro is in the ili of Moonui. My jump kihapai from Mans, I kihapai of taro, is in the ill of Luluki. My jump kihapai from Kanehailua, I kihapai of sweet potatoes, is in the ili of Haleuli. My house lot is 140 feet by 120 feet. My mauka house lot is 144 feet by 270 feet. HAKUOLE Honomalino, Kapablua No. 8560, Kanehailua N.R. 535v8 Here is my'ili, received from Lukehiwa, a large III from the upland to the sea. My jump kihapais are; 1 kihapai of taro at Aimoeiki'iIi, received from Lio, and I kihapai of taro at Aimoenui 'ih, received from Lukehiwa. My house lot is mauka and is 20 by 15. KANEHAILUA Honomalino, Kapalilua N.T. 512v8 No. 8560, Kanehailua Keawekolona and Haao,-swom, they have seen his land. Section 1 - Haleuli III in Honomalino ahupuaa from Lukahiwa in 1840. Section 2 - Taro kihapai in Aimoeiki. Section 3 - Taro kihapai in Aimoeiki nui, from Lukahiwa in 18490. Surrounded by the konobiki's land and title good. [Award 8560; R.P. 5219; Honomalino Kona; 2 ap.; 2.07 Acs] B-4 / 24 No. 8059, Hakuole 11040 N.R. 524-525v8 Here are my kihapais received from Lukehi - 1 kihapai of taro is in the i1i of Moonui. My jump kihapai from Mans, 1 kihapai of taro, is in the ill of Luliild. My jump kihapai from Kmehailua, 1 kihapai of sweet potatoes, is in the ili of Haleuli. My house lot is 140 feet by 120 feet. My mauka house lot is 144 feet by 270 feet. HAKUOLE Honomalino, Kapalilua No. 8566, Kamanuwai N.R. 535v8 Here are my kibapais received from Lukehiwa: 1 kihapai of taro and 1 of sweet potatoes. Ekaka is the /name of/ the mo'o. My house lot is mauka. KAMANUWAI Honomalino, Kapahlua, South Kona N.T. 513v8 No. 8566, Kamanuwai Keawekolua and Wahapai, sworn they have seen this land. Section 1 - 2 kihapais of potato and taro in Ekaha III of Honomalino ahupma. Section 2 - House lot in Aimoenui of Honomalino ahupuaa from Lukahiwa in 1840. No disputes. Surrounded by konohiki's land. [Award 8566; R.P. 6598; Honomalino S. Kona; 2 ap.; 2.72 Acs] No. 11040, Hakuole, Honomalino, Kapalilua, South Kona N.R. 609v8 These are my 3 kihapai, received from Uoa, /and/ 1 kihapai of taro in Kukuihaaiki mo'o. 1 jump kihapai of taro, received from Lakehiwa, is in Aimoenui mo'o. 1 jump kihapai of taro received from Mana, is in Leileiild mo'o. 1 jump kihapai of sweet potatoes, received from Kanehailua, is in Haleuli mo'o. I have two house lots. The mauka one is 35 by 27. The second house lot is 40 by 20. HAKUOLE N.T. 509v8 No. 11040, Hakuole, 7 December 1849 Keawekolona and Wahapai, sworn, they have seen his land. Section 1 - 4 taro kihapais in Leilei III in Honomalino ahupuaa from Noa in 1847. Section 2 - 3 potato kihapais, 4 taro kihapais in Kukuihea III. Section 3 - Potato kihapai in Koeleele ili. Section 4 - 3 taro kihapais, 2 potato kihapais. Section 5 - House lot in Koeleele ili in Honomalino ahupuaa, from Lukaihiwa in 1840. No objections. Land bounded by the land of the konohiki. [Award 11040; R.P. 5112; Honomalino S. Kona; 1 ap.; 4.56 Acs; R.P. says 4.35 Acs] No. 11001, Wana, Honomalino, Kapalilua, Kona N.R. 608v8 Here is my ili of land - it is cut up, from the upland where two is grown to the kula where sweet potato is grown. It was received from Lukehiwa. I have 1 kihapai of tam. I have a jump kihapai of bananas, from Kaikuahine. I have 1 jump kihapai of sweet potatoes from Kahailua. One house lot is 30 in circumference. MANA /sic/ N.T. 511-512v8 No. 11001, Mana Keawekolona and Kaanaana, sworn, they have seen this land. Section 1 - Leileiiki ili in Honomalino ahupum from Lukahiwa in 1840. Section 2 - Potato kihapai in Haleuli ili of Honomalino ahupuaa in I W. Surrounded by the konohiki's land. No disputes. [Award 11001; R.P. 6599; Honomalino S. Kona; 1 ap.; 4.75 Acs] Omoka`a Ahupua`a No. 8059, Nalwi Here are my kihapais received from Kiekie in the ili of Puulei: 3 kihapai of sweet potatoes, and 2 of taro. I received 2 kihapai of two from Naheana in the ili of Kamuku. My 1 kihapai of bananas was received from Pau. A house lot is 40 by 20. NAIWI District 3, Island of Hawau N.T. 511v8 No. 8059, Hakuole (Naiui) Lonohiwa and Kiekie, sworn, they have seen his land. Section 1 - 5 taro and potato kihapais at Puulu ili of 0makaa ahupuaa, from Kiekie in 1844. Section 2 - 2 potato and taro kihapais from Waa in 1844, Section 3 - Two kihapai in Mawae ili from Nakm in 1844. Boundaries are surrounded by the konohiki's land. [Award 8059; R.P. 3966; Oomakm S. Kona; 1 ap.; 4.4 Acs] No. 8059, Naiwi Here are my kihapais received from Kiekie in the ili of Pmilei: 3 kihapai of sweet potatoes, and 2 of taro. I received 2 kihapai of tam from Naheana in the ili of Kamuku. My I kihapai of bananas was received from Pan. A house lot is 40 by 20. NAIWI District 3, Island of Hawaii B-4 / 25 N.T. 511v8 No. 8059, Hakuole (Naiui) Lonohiwa and Kiekie, sworn, they have seen his land. Section 1 - 5 two and potato kihapais at Puulu ili of 0makaa ahupuaa, from Kiekie in 1844. Section 2 - 2 potato and taro kihapais from Wan in 1844. Section 3 - Taro kihapai in Mawae ili from Nukes. in 18". Boundaries are surrounded by the konohiki's land. [Award 8059; A.P. 3966; Oomakaa S. Kona; 1 ap.; 4.4 Acs] Miloli'i Ahupua `a No. 8119, Hu (deceased), Kalehuna (wahine), heir N.T.508v8 Punikaniha, sword, he has seen this land. Section 1 - Haleokane and Kahoalcm ilis in Milolii ahupuaa from Kaiui in 1827. No objections. Land bounded by the land of the konobiki. Section 2 - House lot in Paliona in Milolii ahupuaa, from Kaiui in 1827. [Award 8119; R.P. 7922; Milolii S. Kona; 2, ap.; 2.63 I/3 Acs] Kapua Ahupua `a No. 7927 Kama Here is my ili, received from Namaielua, extending from the sea to the upland where two is grown. There we 10 mala of sweet potatoes, 4 mold of taro, 1 of pumpkin. y "jump" kihapais from Nooluo l?I are 6 mala of two. I also have a house lot which is 58 in circumference. Kapalilua, South Kona KAMA No.7934 Kapa Here is my 'ili of land, received from Namaielus. The moo is Kailiolm. My cultivated kihapai are: 10 Mato of sweet potatoes, I of taro, I of gourd, 2 of lauhala. Here are my "jump" kihapais: in the moo named Abele are 4 mala of sweet potatoes and I of taro. Another' jump" kihapai is in Haleola, with 3 mala of sweet potatoes. The house lot is 22 by 16, a circumference of 76. Kapua, Kapalilua, District 3 KAPA No. 7940 Kaaua Here is my 'ili of land received from Namaielua. The mo'o is Kipu, in a large 'ili from the upland to the sea. My cultivated kihapais are: 8 mala of sweet potatoes, 5 of taro, 2 of lauhala, 3 of gourd. My 'Jump" kihapai are I main of sweet potatoes in the moo of Puhinahi. At Puubirathine, received from Namaielua, are 3 mala of sweet potatoes, I of lauhala, and also a house lot. Kam, Kapalilua, District 3 KAAUA No. 10528 Nahulu Kapua, South Kona, District 3 Here is my 'Ili of land, received from Namaielus, at Puuhinahina, a mail mo'o. From the sea to inland there are 4 mala of sweet potatoes, 8 mala of tam and a mala of bananas. NAHULU No. 10530 Naolulo Here is my'ili, received from Namaielua. The name of the mo'o is Kauleokalani-it is a small land area. From the upland two culture zone to the kola sweet potato zone, there are 9 mala of sweet potatoes, 5 of two, 2 of sugarcane, I ofbanares, I of arrowroot, and I of lauhala. My "jump" Uhapai, received from Namaielua, is 1 mala of watermelon. Kapua, South Kona, District 3 NAOLUA /sic/ No. 7940C, Kelilaimole N.T. 505v8 Kaia and Kaiawalu, sworn, they have seen Kaneio write this claim and it is an Ili Konomhonua in Manuka ahupuaa. It was given by Puhi in 1819, the land of the konohiki surrounds this land. [Award 7940C; Kapua S. Kona; 1 ap. 2.9 Acs] No. 9971"H, Wm. P. Leleiohoku, Honolulu, February 14, 1848 N.R. 502-506v4 The Land Commissioners, Greetings: I hereby state on this paper, and on the attached paper, all my claims for land, from Hawaii to Kauai, genuine claims for land, and house lot claims. Here are the claims for'Aina maoli /land genuinely owned/: The Lands of Wm. P. Leleiohoku: The Lands, Type of Land, District, Island 1. Hooker, Ahupua'a, Kona, Hawaii 2. Kilos, Ahupuaa, no award, Kona, Hawaii 3. Honokohauiki, Ahupuaa, Kona, Hawaii 4. Katunalumalu, Ahupuaa, Kona, Hawaii 5. Lauhulu, Ahupuaa, no award, Kona, Hawaii 6. Auhaukeae, Ahupuaa, Kekauonohi, Kona, Hawaii, laid off ... page 614 v 10 7. Mocauoa, Ahupuaa, Kona, Hawaii 8. Lehuulaild, Ahupuaa, Kona, Hawaii, Halepohaku, Kailua; Halelau, Kailas; Pahips, Waimea, Hawaii 9. Kapua, Ahupuaa, Kona, Hawaii B-4 / 26 10. Hiles, Ahupum, L. Kamehameha, Kau, Hawaii 11. Kahilipali, Ahupuaa, Kau, Hawaii 12. Kahuku, Ahupuaa, no award, Kau, Hawaii l3. Puaaloa (none), Ahupuaa, Palm, Puna, Hawaii 14. Kikala, Ahupuaa, Hilo, Hawaii 15. Waikoloa, Ahupuaa, Hamakua, Hawaii 16. Honopue, Ahupuaa, none, Hamakua, Hawaii; Honopueo 17. Kaiwiki, Ahupuaa, Hamakua, Hawaii 18. Paslaea, Ahupuaa, Hamakua, Hawaii 19. Niulii, Ahupuaa, Kohala, Hawaii 20. Awalua, Ahupuaa, none, Kohala, Hawaii; Lot at Tole Two 21. Poepoe, Ahupuaa, Kohala, Hawaii 22. Puanui, Ahupusa, Kohala, Hawaii 23. Hukiaa, Ahupuaa, none, Kohala, Hawaii 24. Kealahewa, Ahupuaa, to Kaonaeha, Kohala, No. 8595B, Hawaii 25. Kapaa, Ahupuaa, to Kale Davis, Kohala, No. 852213, Hawaii 26. West half of the District of Hamakua poko (none), Maui 27. Napuumaile, Ahupuaa, none, Hamakualoa, Maui 28. Hanawana, Ahupuaa, to Kanui H.K. No.5250, Hamakualoa, Maui; of Kaiko 29. Kuiaha, Ahupuaa, Hamakualoa, Maui 30. Puako, Ahupuaa, none, Lamina, Maui 31. Aki 2, Ahupuaa, Kekauonohi, Lahaina, Maui 32. Kamalo Kaamola, Ahupuaa, No. 9971, Kona, Molokai 33. Punaluu, Ahupuaa, Koolau poko, Molokai [Oahu?] The Minutes of P. Council May 27, 1850 34. Punalau, Ahupuaa, Koolauloa, Oahu 35. Kaakopua, a mahina /farm/, Honolulu, Oahu Those are my lands - some Ahupua'as and the'ilis in them and the half of the district of Hamakua-Poko. The 'ilis and the Isles of these ahupua'as and the leles and 'ills which are in the lands of others , and their lihis and places. The Uhi Leles and the claims for lihi and mahina and ko'ele, and the lihis from upland to sea, and the fishing grounds, perhaps, and all the rights which pertain to these lands, are what I hereby ask for, to quiet title and award to me, excepting the Government's ko'eles which are not attached; if however the Governments po'alua is not also changed, and the ko'eles which enrich it, without being for the benefit of the populace, and if some words opposing these claims are not reinvestigated, then, consider me, without my having to ask, in the way that I am now quieting title. All the land has been surveyed on its boundaries for the exact separation of the division, and the payment of the commutation has been made. This is also for the Government and the Government will pay for its survey if it passes to its share, if not, however, it is not possible to divide up the Government's Third. The witnesses of these claims are the populace who well know of my occupancy, and also the Kines Mahele Book, which is well known These lands are for myself and for ourselves and my heirs and representatives and we shall be able to work on these claims when our time shall come to substantiate them. I am, respectfully, your obedient servant, W. P. LELEIOHOKU Here are the house lot claims and the sites, some claims for land on Hawaii, Maui, and here on Oahu. There are numbered as follows: No. t "Hulihee Lot and the house within" at Kon, Hawaii. No. 2 House lot for Tailor Shop at Keopu, Kona, Hawaii. No. 3 Lot at Kaaipuhi. No. 4 A lot at Niumalu. No. 5 Kaiakeakn Lot. No. 6 Puuloa Lot at Lanihau. No. 7 Lot occupied by Laioha. No. 8 House site at a place called the Fort, of the Island of Hawaii, with five houses in it. No. 9 Lot in Kahaluu. No. 10 Papaula Lot at Honmula. No. 1 I Papa, house site at Honuaula. No. 12 Lot for Naluana. No. 13 Kaualomahe Lot at Honaunu. No. 14 Waioha, house lot at Honaumm. No. 15 Lot at Holualoa. No. 16 Lot at Kianaloli. No. 17 House site mauka of Kainaliu. No. 18 Lot at Kuapehu, Kaawaloa. No. 19 some house sites, named Kaaipu in Kawaihae, Kohala. No. 20 Kaaeao is the name, at Kalaeone in Kawaihae. No. 21 House site named Poohuai. No. 22 House site in the middle of the commoners' land. No. 23 Karnakahonu Lot in Waimea. No. 24 Kaaihapm at Puako. No. 25 Two house lots at I61e. No. 26 House site at Niulii, Kohala. No. 27 Lot at Waipio, Hamakn. No. 28 Lot at Kamaoa, Kau. No. 29 Three lots at Kahilipah, Kau. No. 30 Lot at Keopu, Kaluapaa. No. 31 Lot at Kalamamm. No. 32 Lot occupied by Lee, Kailm. No. 33 Lot to Umiokalani at Kailm. No. 34 Lot occupied by Kamauoha. No. 35 Lot at Pakina in Kau, occupied by Laanui. B-4 / 27 No. 36 House lot at Kuhns, Lahaina, Maui. No. 37 House lot occupied by Kainu in Honolulu. No. 38 Parcel of land named Pakaka occupied by Jimo Robinson /James Robinsou/ No. 39 Kaaihee on the east of the kula of Kahn, a lele of Kalawahine, seaward of Makik . Your obedient servant, WM P. LELEIOHOKU N.T. 430440v10 No. 9971, William Pitt Leleihoku, I December 1854 Lot 54 - House lot in Kahaluu M. Kekuanaoa had come in to say that this land in Kahaluu, Kona, Hawaii for which Wm. P. Leleihoku had filed a claim was not his true claim. when J.A. Kuakini went to Eve on Hawaii all of Kahaluu was given to him (Leleihoku) as administrator under Kinau and it was that way until the time had come to transmit (the estate) to the heir of the property owner. Everything which he had done for the estate has been with V. Kamamalu to the present day; therefore, he (Leleihoku) has no clear claim. See Document following: l December 1854 To those who settle claims, greetings. This is in regards to the claim of Leleihoku which our guardian had given us in kahaluu. I have relinquished that (claim) because I do not understand it; therefore, I shall have nought to do about it. Thus be it that you may all hear (know). Keelikolani N.T. 433-439v10 No. 9971, William Pitt Leleiohoku (firm page 210),23 November 1854 Lot 36 - Hulihee Pa in Kailua, Kona, Hawaii Naea (kane), sworn, I have seen this claim of Hulihee Pa in Kailua, Kona, Hawaii. Monks by government road Kohala by vacant land, the sea Makai by the sea South Kona by the sea, vacant land. Land from J.A. Kuakini long before the kauana of the Kanaina's in 1837. It was a vacant land, but Huhhee built the fence and five houses which are still standing there now with a surrounding enclosure. W.P. Leleiohoku received this bequested land from J.A. Kuakini after his death in 1845, probably. William Pitt Leleiohoku is dead, he had bequested his entire estate to Kinau, his son and he (Kinau) has it this day without objections. Lot 37 -Tailor shop site - I have seen this tailor shop and land in Keopu of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by vacant land Kohala by the Kaai's lot Makai by government road South Kona leading to the upland, a trail. W.P. Leleiohoku's land from J.A. Kuakmi after his death and J.A. Kuakini's land was received before the statutes. No objections The place has been enclosed and C. Kamina is offering objections at this time. Lot 38 -House lot in Kaaipuhi. I have seen this house lot "Kaaipuhi" in Keopu, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka and all around by vacant land. W.P. Leleiohoku had received this lot from J.A. Kuakim after big death (J.A. Kuakini) and Kuakim had received it in 1830. No objections. Lot 39 - House lot at Niu nalu - I have seen this house lot "Niumalu," in Keopu, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by Kalanao's land Kohala by Kaneianale's land Makai by government road South Kona by vacant land. J.A. Kuakim received this land in 1841 or 1842, probably from Kaneianale and he has it without objections. Lot 40 - "Kaiakekua Pa" - I have seen this pa in Niumalu, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka and all wound surrounded by stone wall. Land had been from Kolii to Ruth Keelikolani in 1834, and she has had it to the present. No objections. Lot 41 - "Puuloa Pa" - I have seen this house lot in Lanihau, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by vacant land Kohala to the uplands, a trail Makai by a walk way South Kona by vacant land. Land to R. KeeUolani from Keoua in 1836 and she still has it today. No objections. Lot 42 - House lot dwelling for Laioha. I have seen "Alanaio" in Lanihau, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka, Kohala, makai by stone wall South Kona for C. Kanaina, "Alanaio" pond. B-4 / 28 Land from J.A. Kuakim to W.P. Leleiohoku after his death. Kinau now has it upon Leleiohoku's death. No objections. Lot 43 - House lot at the place called the fort, 5 houses there. I have seen this place "Kamakahonu," in Lanihau, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka, Kohala, Makai byroad South Kona by the sea. Lot from J.A. Kuakini to W.P. Leleiohoku. After Leleiohoku's death it was transmitted to his son Kinau. No objections. Lot 44- House lot in Kahahm. I have seen this house "Kaimuloa," in Kahaluu, Kona, Hawaii Mauka and all around surrounded by stone wall. Land from J.A. Kualdni to W.P. Leleiohoku after his death and Leleiohoku had it until his death. Kinau (Leleiohoku's son) has it to the present by bequest. No objections. Kalaikuaiwa (wahine) and Waikulono (wahine) swom, we have seen all of these house lots as related by Naea and they belong to William Pitt Leleiohoku and Ruth Keelikolani. No one has objected to them to the present. Lot 45 - Papaula Pa, 24 November 1854 Kalaikuaiwa (wahine), swom, I have seen his Papaula, a place in Honuaula of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by government road Kohala by sea, beach Makai by the sea South Kona by vacant land Land from J.A. Kuakini in 1834. Kuakim had received it before 1834. No objections. Lot 46 - Papa Pa. I have seen this place in Honuaula of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by vacant land Kohala by small road Makai by government road South Kona by vacant land. Lot enclosed with a stone wall. This place was from J.A. Kualdni in 1837 or 1838, probably. He had received it before 1834. No objections. Lot 47 - Naaaaheana or Kaiui has this lot. I have seen this place of W.P. Leleiohoku in Honuaula of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka for some people,a land Kohala leading to the uplands, a trail Makai by a small mad South Kona leading toward mountains, a trail. House lot from Kaiui in 1843. Kaiui had received it from Kamahana, his wife. Kamahana had received it from her (parents?) during the time of Kamehameha I. No objections. Lot 48 - Kanalomalie Pa. Waikulono, mom, I have seen his place "Kanalomalie" in Housman of Kona, Hawaii.. Mauka by Kapalakea's place Makai by vacant land South Kona by small road which separates Kealahaole's place Kohala leading to uplands, a road. Land from his father Kalaimoku before his death in 1825. W.P. Leleiohoku still has it now. Lot 49-Waioha Pa. - I have seen this place in Honaunau, Kona, Hawaii. mauka by Kapalakeo's place Kohala by Kaelehuhthulu's place Makai by vacant place South Kona by Kealahaolds place. Lands from Kalaimoku before 1825. Kalaimoku had received it during Kamehameha I's reign. It has been peaceful to the present. Lot 50 - Lot in Holualoa. I have seen this place in Holualoa 2, Kona Hawaii. Mauka by government road Kohala and all around by stone wall. Land from J.A. Kuakini in 1845. Kuakini had received [it] before 1834. No objections from anyone. Lot 51 - Lot in Hianaloli 2. I have seen this place in Hianaloli 2 of Kona, Hawaii and is surrounded by a stone wallas boundary. These places had been for Oili. He gave it to us in 1844. He had received this land in 1831 and we gave it [to] Leleiohoku. No objections. Lot 52 - "Kainaliu," lot mauka. This place is called "Kahakuwai" and is in Kainaliu of Kona, Hawaii. It is coffee, sugar B-4 / 29 and fanning land. It is surrounded by government land and looks as if it is about 12 acres in size. land from S.A. Kualdru at the time of his death in 1844, he (Kuakini) had received it in 1840. A house has been built and there has been no objections to the present time. Lot 53 - Lot in Kuapehu. This place is in Kaawaloa, of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka and all around stone wall with a house. Kapiolani had bequested this place to J.A. Kuakini in 1841, and upon his death in 1844, it was bequested to W.P. Leleiohoku. Kapiolam had, received it from Naihe, her husband before 1831. Keohokalole has been the only oppressor. Lot 54 - House lot "Kaaipia." I have seen this place in Kawaihae, Kohala, Hawaii. Mauka by vacant pasture land Mahukona by vacant pasture land Makai by beach Kona by vacant land. Lot from Kalaimoku, his father before 1824. Kalaimoku received it at the time of Kamehameha I. Lot 55 - "Kaaiao" Pa. This place is in Kawaihae, Kohala, Hawaii. It is surrounded by vacant land, it has 2 houses and is 1/4 acre in size. WT. Leleiohoku received this land from J.A. Kuakini in 1844. Kuakini had received it as vacant land in 1840. No objections to the present. Lot 56 - Poohuai Pa. This place is in Kawaihae of Kohala, Hawaii. Mauka, Mahukona by vacant land Makai by beach Kona by vacant land. J.A. Kuakini gave this land to Leleiohoku in 1844. T.A. Kuakini had received it in 1839. G.L. Kapeau is now opposing the reason is not known. Lot 57 - Lot in the center of the common people's land. I have seen this place in Onouli of Kohala, Hawaii and it is surrounded by vacant land. Land received from J.A. Kuakini upon his death. He had received it at the time of Kamehameha I. No objections. Lot 58 - Lot of "Kamakahonu" - this place is in Waimea, Kohala, Hawaii. Mauka by the foreigners' land Kohala and Mekai by vacant land Kona by a stream. Land from S.A. Kuakim in 1844. He had received it in 1830. No objections to the present Lot 59 - Lot of Walachia I have seen this place in Kohala, Hawaii and it is surrounded by vacant land. Only two sides of it have been enclosed. Land from J.A. Kus kini in 1844. Kuakini had received it in 1830. No objections to the present time. Lot 60 - Kaaihapuu Pa. Puako, Kohala, Hawaii. Postponed until a witness is found: Lot 61 - 2 houses in Iole, Kohala, Hawaii. Waikulono: swom, I have seen these lots. Section 1: Mauka by Government road Makai by Reverend Bond's place Hamakua and Kona by vacant land. Section 2: Mauka and Hamakua by vacant land Makai by the Chinese place Kona by Government road. Land from J. Kuakini to W.P. Leleiohoku in 1844. Kuakini had received it in 1841 as vacant land. In 1850, these places were conveyed to the government as was approved by the Privy Council. Lot 62 - House site in Niulii, Kohala, Hawaii. This has been included in Niulii land of Wm. P. Leleiohoku as distributed by the king. Lot 63 - Lot in Waipio, Hamakua, Hawaii. I have seen this place named "Hoakikala." It has been enclosed with a stone wall. Mauka by a stream Hilo by a river Makai and Kohala by vacant land. Land from J.A. Kuakini to Wm. P. Kaleleiohoku in 1844. Kuakini had received it in 1831. No objections. No. 64 - Lot in Kzmaoa, Kau, Hawaii. Postponed until a witness is found. B-4 / 30 Lot 65 - 3 lots in Kahilipali of Kau, Kona. Postponed until a witness is available. Lot 66 - Lot Kalauao is occupying. [?] Waikulono, sworn, I have seen this place in Keopu of Kaluapaa, Kona, Hawaii. Mauka and Kohala by vacant land Makai by Government road South Kona by vacant land. J.A. Kuakini's land to Wm. P. Leleiohoku in I W. Kuakim had received it from kalauao before 1839. No objections to the present time. Lot 67 - Lot is Kalamaumi, Napoopoo, Kona, Hawaii. Postponed until a witness is available. Lot 68 - Lot has this lot. I have seen this place in Lanihau of Kona, Hawaii. Mauka by Amara's place/vacant land Kohala by Government land Makai by vacant land South Kona by a stream. This place has been for Kaiama and he gave it to Loc, his wife before she died in 1823, or 1824 probably. In 1848, before Lae's death she conveyed it to Wm. P. Leleiohoku and he has it now. No objections. Kalaikuaiwa and Nan, sworn, We have known in the same way as stated in the above testimony. Postponed until the 29th. No. 10380, Naluhtelua, Kapuakou, Kapalilua, Hawaii N.IL 593v8 I have a ]rouse lot, 80 fathoms by 60 fathoms, also 2 mo'o, received from Lanai, with 4 kihapai of taro, 1 mala of bananas and 3 mala o£sweet potatoes. NALUHTELUA [Award 10380; Kapua S. Kona; I ap.; 2 Acs] No. 10527, Namaielua, Kapua, Kapalilua, Hawali N.R. 597v8 Here is my claim in the ahupua' a of Kapua, received from Leleiohoku. These are the mala I cultivate: 6 mala of taro, 8 of sweet potatoes, 2 of bananas, 2 of sugar cane, 2 of lauhala, 10 of gourd, I of uhi yam. These are the boundaries of Kapua: the sea is on the south and the koa wa'a /zone of the large koa trees) is on the north. There is one fish pond and one house lot, 70 in circumference. NAMAIELUA N.T. 504v8 No. 10527, Namaielua, 7 December 1849 Kona, Ahuole and Kaolelo, sworn, they have seen: Section I - Haleola ili of Kapua shupma. and was from Lanai in 1819, Section 2 - Kalihi ili of Puuhinehina. Section 3 - Taro and sugar cane kihapai in Kaule ili. Section 4 - House lot in Kailiohia ili with 2 houses. Land from Kauai in 1819. no disputes. Section I Mauka by Nahulu and Nahuhielua K [Kau] by Konohiki K (Makai] by Sea K [Kona] by Naohele's land. Section 2 - MKKK [Mauka, Ka'u, Makai, Kona] by konchiki's land is on all sides. Section 3 - MKKK [Mauka, Ka'u, Makai, Kona] by konohiki's land is on all sides. Section 4 - MKKK [Mauka, Ka'u, Makai, Kona] by konohiki's land is on all sides. [Award 10527; Kapua S. Kona; 2 ap.; 4.67 Acs] Okoe Ahupua`a No. 7931 Kaaumoana Here is my claim, an ahupua'a (in the Native Testimony, claimant has an 'ih), from Keana. 3 mala of taro, 7 of sweet potatoes, I of wauke, 5 of lauhala. The /kind of/ tree which I may take is the ulei. My house lot is 60 by 40, a circumference of 200. Okoe 1, Kapalilua, South Kona Kaaumoana B-4 / 31 No. 7935 Kul Here is my claim for an ahupua'a (in the Native Testimony, claimant has an 'Ih), from Nakookoo. On the south is the sea, on the north is the forest. The /kind of/ tree which I may take is the kukui. There are 9 mala of sweet potatoes, 2 of gourd, I of coffee, I of taro, and 5 of lauhala. Okoe 2, Kapalilua, District 3 KUI No. 7941 Kaelemakule Here are my moos, received from Kai. Thew names are Halekamahine and Lihiiki. On the south is the sea, on the north is the forest. There are 9 mala of sweet potatoes, 3 of taro, I of gourd, and 2 of louhala. My jump" kihapai is at Kapua, received from Kopa, 1 mala of taro. The house lot is 30 by 20, a circumference of 100. Okoe, Kapalilua, District 3 KAELEMAKULE No. 7930, Kapu N.R. 515v8 Here are my 2 mo'o. Haleolono is one and Lihiiki is another. On the south is the sea, on the north is the forest. 2 mala of taro and 9 of sweet potatoes are in Haleolono 'ili. 13 mala of sweet potatoes are in the mo'o of Lihiiki. Those are my "jump" kihapais. 1 mala of sweet potatoes is in the mo'o of Kawaehonua. I have a "jump" kihapai from Kaaumoana, 2 mala of sweet potatoes in the mo'o of Luape. KAPU Okoe 1, Kapalilua, South Kona Miloi`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center: Section 106 Analysis and Cultural Impact Assessment 109 Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 BLANK PAGE Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 110 Ri Photo by Pa'a Pono Miloli'i Miloi`i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Miloli'i, Ho`opuloa, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii, Hawaii Section 106 Analysis and Cultural Impact Assessment Prepared by Trisha Kehaulani Watson, JD, PhD and Joseph Farber for Pa'a Pono Miloli'i February 2012 Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com nn Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center 111 Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 Qualifications of Evaluator 36 CFR Part 61 defines the Secretary of Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for the minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment activities in historic preservation. Dr. Trisha Kehaulani Watson (JD, PhD American Studies) meets the History (Historic Preservation) Professional Qualification Standards. I. Background Pa'a Pono Miloli'i, a community formed 501(c)(3) incorporated for the purpose of preserving and protecting the cultural, historical, environmental and archaeological life and heritage within the ahupua'a of Ho'okena, Papa, Ho'opuloa, Miloli'i, Omoka'a, Kalihi, Honomalino, and Kapu'a in South Kona, Hawaii is currently preparing an environmental assessment for the purpose of assessment any potential impact of the proposed action, which is to design and construct a multi -purpose community center in Miloli'i on State-owned lands to address the community's need for a permanent, covered community center and gathering space for public meetings, cultural activities, and educational and recreational programs. Pa'a Pono Miloli'i is engaging in this activity with the support of funding received by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development ("HUD"). Pa'a Pono Miloli'i (PPM) was first formed in 1980 (and formally incorporated in 1983), as Pa'a Pono Miloli'i, Inc., to improve the quality of life for the residents of Miloli'i and South Kona. Among PPM's first efforts was the creation of a Master Plan for the Miloli'i community that focused on supporting residents to secure land and build safe affordable homes in the village. Working directly with the state Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA), the state Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), and the Legislative and Executive branches of the State of Hawai'i, PPM successfully lobbied for the passage of Act 62, which provided homes for the descendants of the 1926 Mauna Loa lava flow which had destroyed the original village at Ho'opuloa. Building on the success of this effort, PPM has carried out numerous community projects over the years. Paa Pono Milolii re- incorporated as Pa'a Pono Miloli'i in 2003. The non-profit organization was granted 501(c)(3) status by the Internal Revenue Service in 2004 and continues its mission to improve the lives of the residents of the South Kona fishing village. PPM is proposing to utilize federal HUD EDI funds to design and construct a multi -purpose community center in Miloli'i on State-owned lands to address the community's need for a permanent, covered community center and gathering space for public meetings, cultural activities, and educational and recreational programs such as: • Youth programs, whether after school, summer, or over school breaks • Intergenerational activities connecting youth and kWpuna • Team sports including basketball, volleyball, and others • Canoe paddling and racing • Hawaiian language classes • Micro -enterprise development and training programs. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 112 The proposed action is to build three structures totaling 4,800 square feet in two phases. In Phase I, the main multi -purpose community center (Community Center) would be constructed. The Community Center's footprint is 80 ft. long and 50 ft. wide, or 4,000 square feet. As designed, the Community Center features a large, covered central lanai with enclosed office, visitor reception center, and history/library rooms in the south end of the building, and an enclosed kitchen and classroom at the north end. Phase II will involve construction of two separate adjoining structures north of the Community Center: a guest quarters and restroom facility. Both structures measure 20 ft. x 20 ft., or 400 square feet in size. The guest quarters contain two separate suites, each with a single -bed bedroom and a bathroom with a sink, toilet, and shower. The restroom building contains separate male and female facilities: the men's has two lavatories, two water closets and one urinal; the women's has two lavatories, and two water closets. The three proposed structures will be designed and constructed to meet Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines (ADAAG). The buildings will be constructed on concrete slab foundations surrounded by tile and concrete flooring, concrete columns, plaster -finished walls with exterior stone veneers, and fixed, sliding glass, and jalousie windows. The simple gable roofs, clad in aluminum, will overhang the structure with 4'8 eaves on the two smaller buildings, and 5 feet on the main pavilion. The main pavilion's roof ridge rises to a height of 22 feet. Concrete walkways enclose the perimeter of the buildings, 5 feet wide on the main build, and four feet wide on the two smaller structures. The plumbing and electrical lines will be standard. Water will be supplied through a catchment system. A septic tank and leach field system will be constructed for the wastewater. Electrical generation will come from solar panels and a generator to serve as back up. This document is being prepared for the purpose of assessing what impacts, if any, the project may have on historic or cultural resources in the area of potential effect (APE) or region of influence (ROI). Such analyses are required under the Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act and Hawaii Revised Statues §343. II. Section 106 Analysis Section 106 of the National Historical Preservation Act addresses the need for federal agencies to take into account impacts, if any, undertakings have on historic properties. Protection of Historic Properties and Section 106 analysis are regulated under 36 CFR Part 800. This part provides guidelines as to conducting an analysis in assessing when and how to undergo Section 106 review. A. Establishing Undertaking Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 113 The first step in initiating the Section 106 process constitutes determining whether or not a proposed Federal action is an undertaking as defined in 36 CFR §800.16(y), which states: "Undertaking means a project, activity, or program funded in whole or in part under the direct or indirect jurisdiction of a Federal agency, including those carried out by or on behalf of a Federal agency; those carried out with Federal financial assistance; and those required a Federal permit, license or approval." It has been determined that this proposed action is an undertaking as defined in §800.16(y). B. Area of Potential Effect or Region of Influence The Area of Potential Effect (APE) or Regional of Influence (ROI) for this project includes the project location and affected environments (including project site and adjacent lands). 1. Project Location Miloli'i Beach Road Miloli'i, HI 96704 Ahupua'a: Ho'opuloa District: South Kona Island: Hawai'i Tax Map Key No.: (3) 8-9-014: 038, 039, 040, and 041. Size: 40,000 sq. ft. (0.918 acre). 2. Region of Influence Miloli'i is a coastal village located on the relatively flat Kapalilua coastal plain. Its shoreline features include a black sand beach at Ho'opuloa Bay; broad, gently sloping seaward extensions of lava flows between Ho'opuloa and Miloli'i bays and Kapulau Point; and shallow and exposed lava platform reefs separating Miloli'i and Omoka'a bays. The coastal lava flows are derived from prehistoric flows and the 1926 flow. A tongue of lava from the 1926 flow enters the water south of Ho'opuloa Bay and then rises about thirty feet above the adjacent lava, where 62 individual single-family lots of 10,000 square feet each have been developed. These lots, known as Miloli'i Village Phase II, are two deep along the makai side of the Miloli'i Road, with a common access drive for four lots. At about midpoint of the Phase II development, the 1926 flow ends and the land abruptly drops about 30 feet into a broad gully about 400 feet wide. It is within this low-lying gully that the project site is located, covering four of the single-family lots. About 150 feet south of the project site, the coastal plain rises again, and the remaining Phase II house lots continue south. The project site consist of four parcels of 10,000 sq. ft. each, all of which are owned by the State of Hawai'i. The parcels are unoccupied and currently serve no purpose. The project site has been previously graded and contains the remnants of an abandoned demonstration water desalination facility that was constructed in 1990 and intended to service the area residents. This remnant is mostly contained on the mauka lots (Lots 38 and 41) and includes a large Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 114 concrete pad (about 30 ft. x 30 ft.), metal and rubber piping, and a large wooden single -story shed. Approximately 3/4 of the makai lots (Lots 39 and 40) have been cleared and graded. The remaining '/4 (about 25 feet) of these two parcels, running along the length of their makai boundaries, consist of a mound of lava rock about four feet high. The mound is the result of grading portions of the parcels and pushing the excess lava and soils makai. Atop this mound vegetation typical of the region, such as kiawe (Prosopis pallida) and Christmas berry (Echinus terebinthifolius) has established. Adjacent to the southern mauka-makai property line of parcels 38 and 39 is a graded and compacted gravel beach right-of-way access road 100 ft. long and 50 ft. wide, connecting Miloli`i Road to the shoreline. The access road narrows and becomes rough as it nears the shoreline. The shoreline in this area is very rocky and allows very limited and difficult access to the ocean. C. Determining Presence of Historic Properties NHPA Section 106 requires the agency to "take into account the effect of (an) undertaking on any district, site, building, structure, or object that is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register (of Historic Places.)" 16 U.S.C. § 470f. NHPA section 101(d)(6)(B) requires agency officials to consult with any Native Hawaiian organization that attaches religious and cultural significance to historic properties that may be affected by an undertaking, regardless of the location of the property. 36 CFR §800.16 provides the following definition of a "historic property": (1)(1) Historic property means any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties. The term includes properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register criteria. Hawaiian historical sites of significance include, but not limited to: sites related to traditional Hawaiian navigation and other seafaring traditions, traditional Hawaiian fishponds, ko'a (traditional Hawaiian fishing shrines typically consisting of piles of coral or stone), Hawaiian heiau (religious structures), Native Hawaiian burial sites, leina (places from which spirits leapt into the spirit world), and other cultural heritage properties. NHPA section 106 requires an agency to make a reasonable and good faith effort to identify historic properties, determine whether identified properties are eligible for listing on the National Register, assess the effects of the undertaking on any eligible historic properties found, determine whether the effect will be adverse; and avoid or mitigate any adverse effects. To this end, NHPA regulations require an agency to provide Native Hawaiian organizations, as consulting parties, with "a reasonable opportunity to identify its concerns about historic properties, advise on the identification and evaluation of historic properties, including those of traditional religious and cultural importance, articulate its views on the undertaking's effects on such properties, and participate in the resolution of adverse effects." 36 CFR § 800.2(c)(2)(ii)(A). Review of existing archeological studies and historical documents reveal no evidence of any "historical properties" within the APR or ROL No documented archaeological sites have been found in the area of the project site. Extensive community led studies have been done Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 IMP regarding the historical, cultural, and archeological resources of the area. A 1984 Master Plan conducted by Pa'a Pono Miloli'i provides substantial insight into the history of Miloli'i. The history of human settlement in the Miloli'i-Ho'opuloa area undoubtedly extends back into the first millennium A.D. though little remains in the area to tell of this story. Less than a mile to the north of the current community at Alika Bay are the visible remains of a holua slide and a number of ancient house sites. Less than a mile to the south at Honomalino Bay are more ancient house sites. These extensive sites suggest the area was once one of sizeable human activity. The community's recorded history is tied closely to that of the church. In the early nineteenth century, missionaries occasionally would make the long journey from Kailua to preach and instruct in the ways of the Gospel. In 1831 and again in 1835, the missionaries conducted the first complete census in Hawai'i. The 1835 census included the villages of Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa under the District name of "Kapalilua." At that time there were a total of 1,406 people recorded being in the district (486 kane, 488 wahine, 219 Keikikane and, 213 Keikiwahine). By 1854, Miloli'i had grown to become the site of one of the six major churches in the Kona District and had a congregation of 14 members. By 1883, the size of the congregation had grown to warrant the Miloli'i church, Hau'oli Kamana'o, designated as a separate mission. The church is still standing and though moved from its original site by "an act of God," it provides a link to the past for the community's residents. The resident populations at Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa remained constant but small throughout the latter nineteenth century and declined slightly at the turn of the century. The 1910 census of Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa reflected a total population of 98. This included 8 households at Miloli'i and 4 households around the bay at Ho'opuloa. In 1910, the census indicated 72 people living at Miloli'i and 26 at Ho'opuloa. For the next sixteen years, the community remained much as it always had, but, then on the morning of April 18, 1926, life at Ho'opuloa was altered forever. Molten lava from Mauna Loa's Pu'u O 'Ke'oke'o gradually approached and completely covered the small coastal fishing village. Many of the families, lacking alternative shelter, moved a quarter mile down the coast to Miloli'i. There they built new homes mostly on government land. Other residents moved mauka and found shelter as best they could. The present Miloli'i-Ho'opuloa community is spread through four original land grants in the ahupua'a of Miloli'i, Ho'opuloa, and Omoka'a: 1. Grant 1581 issued by Kamehameha III in 1855 to Kama for 2.4 acres in the ahupua'a of Ho'opuloa. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 `sR 2. Grant 2738 issued by Kamehameha IV in 1860 to Keli'ikuli for 1,453 acres in the ahupua'a of Ho'opuloa. 3. Grant 1585 issued by Kamehameha III in 1855 to Kaleohano for 275.5 acres in the ahupua'a of Miloli'i. 4. Grant 3079 issued by Kamehameha IV in 1870 to Kiekie for 98.02 acres in the ahupua'a of Omoka'a. These original grants were subdivided further by various Land commission Awards, each with its own long history. Early residents in isolated, rural areas did not always understand the process involved in obtaining legal title to land as defined by the Great Mahele. Residents in Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa were no different from their contemporaries. The portion of the project site that was covered by the1926 flow low may have had sites that were destroyed by lava. Legend has it that an ali'i from Kaua'i is buried in the Kapukawa'aiki area. History does indicate that there was a relationship between the ali'i of Kaua'i and those of Kapalilua. The supposed burial site however, is not in the area near the project proposal (Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984). Between 1973 and 1974 the state conducted a survey in the Miloli'i area in an attempt to identify sites and structures for the "Hawai'i Register of Historic Places." A number of churches and characteristic structures were identified. In the village of Miloli'i these included: • Magoon House — a unique example of a small wooden "Kona House" built in the late nineteenth century of the area. • St. Peter's Catholic Church - a fine example of this architectural style. The Church was built in 1932 by Father Steffen to replace an earlier St. Peter's destroyed by the 1926 lava flow. • Apo House - an example of typical architecture of older houses in the Miloli'i District. • Miloli'i School - an example of this architectural style. • Hau'oli Kamaha'o Congregational Church - an example of architectural style with historical significance. The church was built about 1887 and is an excellent example of early missionary wood construction. D. Determination of "No Effect" Upon determining there may be historic properties present, the analysis turns to whether the undertaking is a type of activity that does not have the potential to cause effects on historic properties. If it does not, then the agency official has no further obligations under NHPA section 106. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 ISM 36 CFR §800.16(i) provides the following definition: "Effect means alternation to the characteristics of a historic property qualifying it for inclusion in or eligibility for the National Register." NHPA regulations provide that an "adverse effect" occurs when an undertaking "may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association." 36 CFR § 800.5(a)(1). Adverse effects may include physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property; alteration or removal of the property, change of the character of the property's use or physical features; introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property's historic features; and transfer, lease, or sale of the property. None of historic resources within the APE are located at the project site, and there is no reason to anticipate that the proposed action would have any impact on these resources, direct or indirect, on these resources. There is no reason to anticipate that the proposed actions would impact on the physical, visual, atmospheric, audible or aesthetic features of any historic properties or resources. Additionally, the State Historic Preservation Division review of the Environmental Assessment for The Water Desalination Plan and Distribution System, under CDUP HA-1653, dated June 28, 1991 and located at project site, noted that the proposed development would have no effect on historic sites: "The site development of the water system will probably have no effect on historic sites. This determination is based on large part by our staff's familiarity with the project area and a number of field inspections made in conjunction with various community projects and concerns... it is apparent that most of the facilities ... are along already altered roadbeds or in previous bulldozed areas. We concur that if any archeological remains are uncovered unexpectedly during construction, they will be preserved and protected by the community working in concert with the State Preservation Division." No previous activities in the area have been determined by the State Historic Preservation Division to have "no effect" on historic properties; our analysis of the current proposed activities supports a "no effect" determination in this case as well. None of the alternatives under consideration in the proposed action entail destruction, modification, or alteration of historic sites, resources, or other historic properties. None of the proposed activities will introduce visual, atmospheric, or audible elements that affect the features of any historic property. Therefore, it is recommended that authorizing agencies find this project has no potential to cause effects on historic properties. Accordingly, initiation of consultation under Section 106 is not required. E. Notice to State Historic Preservation Officer Upon determination that this project has no potential to cause effects on historic properties, the agency should provide notice to the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and the State Historic Preservation Division Administrator of its determination. The agency official shall also notify all consulting parties and provide them with the documentation specified in 36 CFR 800.11(e). Points of contact are as follows: Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 IMR] State Historic Preservation Officer (Hawaii): Bill Aila, Chairman Department of Land and Natural Resources Kalanimoku Building 1151 Punchbowl St. Honolulu, HI 96813 State Historic Preservation Division Administrator (Hawaii): Pua Aiu, PhD, Administrator State Historic Preservation Division Department of Land and Natural Resources 601 Kamokila Blvd., Suite 555 Kapolei, HI 96707 Under 36 CFR §800.3, once the agency official determines that the undertaking is not an activity that has the potential to cause effects on historic properties, the agency official has "no further obligations under section 106 or this part." III. Cultural Impact Assessment Hawaii Revised Statutes §343 requires an environmental assessment of cultural resources. The purpose of this assessment is to analyze the impact of a proposed action on cultural practices and features associated with the project area. This analysis should be integrated and included in the project's Environment Assessment. A. Methodology — Community Involvement This project is atypical in that it is initiated by the community and it is intended to enhance cultural resources and activities. Therefore, the methodology employed in the preparation of this cultural impact assessment deviates from other projects in which the responsible party is not a member of the affected community. Existing secondary data sources, including but not limited to historical collections and reports, were utilized in this analysis, rather than the preferred method of primary data collecting. Community involvement occurred through project initiation and development rather than traditional consultation. In 1984, Pa'a Pono Miloli'i initiated and led a Master Plan for Miloli'i. Pa'a Pono Miloli'i's involvement and development of the proposed action is part of the implementation of that community led planning event. B. Oral Histories There are numerous mele (songs) and mo'olelo (stories) about Miloli'i. Many oral histories have been complied about the value of the area as one of the last Hawaiian fishing villages and about the rich natural resources that still exist there today. One mo'olelo from the early 1900s explained: "This region is seldom visited. Its chief points of interest are the remains of a heiau, mauka of the Catholic church at Milolii, some fine papa konane at the south end of the same village, a well preserved kuula (still used) where fishermen offer offerings of fruit to insure a good catch, by the beach south of Milolii, where the Honomalino Ranch fence crosses the trail; while all along the trail are smaller kuulas, and at many points the Honua Consulting T: (808) 392-1617 PO Box 61395 F: (888) 392-4941 Honolulu, HI 96839 Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 watson@honuaconsulting.com "k foundations of villages, where old implements may still be found." (Maly and Maly, 2003). It has been aptly documented that the link between the cultural practices and natural resources are inseparable in Miloli'i, thus making the area one of the most important in regards to maintaining and enhancing the endemic biocultural resources of Hawaii. Today, the most famed mele of Milolii refer to the "miraculous" events in 1868. La 'Elima (Na Elizabeth Kuahaia) La 'elima o Pepeluali Waimaka helele(he'e nei)'i ke alanui Paiki pu'olo pa'a i ka lima (Maika pu olo a'a ika lima) Waimaka helele 'i i ke alanui! (Ae maka hele he'e nui ike alanui Penei pepe 'alala nei (He nei pepe ala'a nei) He hu'i ma'e'ele kou nui kino (E'u ima a hele kou lui kino) Ha'ina 'ia mai ana ka puana He mele he inoa no Miloli'i (E mele he noe no Miloli'i) This mele captures in song the events of 1868. Still sung today, the tsunami that moved Hau'oli Kamaha'o Church is perhaps the most well-known historical event associated with Miloli'i. It has significantly influenced that mele and mo'olelo that come from the region. Miloli'i is also referenced in numerous other songs. The songs reference Mahukona, the wharf at Miloli'i. Miloli'i also appears in prominent mo'olelo, as in Kaao no Kamapuaa, the tradition of Kamapua'a (Fornander, 1918). While by many accounts, Miloli'i was neither heavily populated nor traversed, the area was commonly and prominently known. In more contemporary times, Pa'a Pono Miloli'i has worked steadily to develop and gather the 'ike, the knowledge or information, from kupuna and residents. Much of this information was documented in the 1984 Master Plan, from which this project emanates. This 'ike is consistent with the traditional mo'olelo and mele associated with the area. C. Cultural Sites and Practices Neither mo'olelo nor mele reveal any potential concern for disruption of sacred cultural sites at the project location or region of influence (ROI), including historic sites and biocultural resources. While there are historic sites within the ROI, there is no anticipated or foreseeable impact on these sites. There is also a wealth of biocultural resources present in the ROI, which are described below. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 The ocean and fishing is at the core of the Miloli'i-Ho'opuloa communities' cultural identity. Primary fishers include a traditional 'opelu (Decapterus sanctae-helenae, Mackerel scad) fishery, near -shore reef fishery, and an off shore pelagic and bottom fishery (Pa'a Pono Miloli'i, 2011). Within the vicinity of the village there are at least four small anchialine ponds; three are to the south between Miloli'i Bay and Kapulau Point, and one just inshore from Kapulau Point, these ponds have a combined surface area of less than 1,100 square feet and are between one and four inches in depth (Pa'a Pono Miloli'i 1984). A shallow reef fifteen to twenty-five feet in depth is located off the village area. The shelf drops and then rises again to form a ledge which gradually falls off seaward at an increasing slope reaching a depth of about 120 feet 1,800 ft. offshore (Ibid.). The coastal waters around Miloli'i-Ho'opuloa are classified as "Class AA" and are protected for "Oceanic research, the support and propagation of shellfish and other marine life, conservation of coral reefs and wilderness areas, compatible recreation, and aesthetic enjoyment." (Ibid.) The area is also of cultural import. One of the traditional ocean boundary markers was known as Kakakohola; it was the boundary marker between Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa. The name comes from mo'olelo which tell of men who, mistaking the rock for a whale, beat on the rock until their paddles broke (Maly and Maly, 2003). Hence the name, Kakakohola, to strike (kaka) the whale (kohola). A US Army Corps of Engineers survey, found that coral development on the surrounding offshore platforms at Miloli'i Bay and its vicinity was "patchy." But coral formations do exist. In the high surge areas, colonies of Pocillopora meandrinaare common but are supplemented with Porites lobatacolonies in medium surge areas. The large boulders at the bases of the lava platforms are encrusted with heavy coral growth of Porites. Finger coral, Porites compressa, dominates the terrace bottom beyond the boulders. Coral growth generally disappears after the ninety -foot depth level (USGS 1981). Besides corals, other animal life includes a number of species of echinoderms (sea urchins), including Tripneustes gratilla, Diadema paucispinum, and Echinothrix diadema, and reef fish. Fish species identified include: Paurupeneus multifasciatus (Moans) Pomacentrus Jenkins (Jenkin's Damsel Fish) Chromis vanderbilti (Vanderbilts Damsel Fish) Acanthurus nigofuscus (Blackish -Brown Sturgeon Fish) Zebrasoma flavescents (La 'i pala, Lau'ipala, Laukipala) Acanthurus mata (Puala, Puwalu) Ctenochaetus strigosus (Kole) (DLNR 1971). Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 IPAl In addition, the paku'iku'i (Acanthurus achilles) a member of the surgeonfish family is an abundant resident of Miloli`i's reef. Milolii was known in story and song for the rich marine resources, with references identifying that those who came to barter with the residents via the boat landing would come away with "dried fish, viz. hauliuli, ahi, aku, hee, pauau, ulua, kahala, ulaula, uhu, moano, humuhumu, oopu, kala" (Maly and Maly, 2003). Marine plant life, limu or, seaweeds, is also plentiful along the coast between Miloli'i and Ho'opuloa. At Papa Bay and Alika Bay where fresh water is discharged into the ocean, the green seaweed Limu pahapaha (Ulva Fasciata) is abundant. D. Impact Assessment There is no indication that the proposed action would have any adverse effect on the cultural resources or practices of the area. Conversely, the proposed action would likely benefit the area and community's cultural resources and practices. The goal of HRS §343 is to require project developers to include the impacted community in their planning. This project is atypical in that the community is the project developer. One of the goals of the project is to enhance the community's capacity to perpetuate and enhance the area's historical resources and cultural practices. 1. Proposed Action The proposed action is expected to have a beneficial effect on cultural resources. As a result of the proposed action, a new permanent community center would be constructed that includes space for a cultural center and exhibition space. These would broadcast and perpetuate the cultural history of the Miloi'i area and celebrate the community itself, thereby enhancing its present-day identity. This is turn would help spur on community members to plan, preserve, protect and perpetuate their cultural resources, archeological sites, historic structures, and traditional cultural practices. 2. No Action Alternative Under the no -action alternative, no construction or ground -disturbing activities would occur. The potential to disturb cultural resources would not exist, so there would be no effect on cultural resources. However, if the community center were not constructed, it would be a loss to the community of a permanent public facility, which is envisioned to enable the people of Miloli'i to strengthen their community ties, honor their past, and perpetuate and pass on their cultural traditions and stories to future generations. References Clark, John R. K., Beaches of the Big Island, University of Hawai'i Press, November 1985. Fornander, Abraham. Fornander collection of Hawaiian antiquities and folk -lore. Bishop Museum Press. 1918. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 122 Kahele, Mona. Clouds of Memories. Kamehameha Schools. 2006. Kuahaia, Elizabeth. La 'Elima (mele). Date Unknown. Makuakane. Miloli'i aku nei a`u la / I ke kau `ekake (or, kekake) la (mele). Kimo Alama Keaulana Collection. Bishop Museum Archives. Date Unknown. Maly, Kepa and Onaona Maly. He wahi mo`olelo no na lawai`a ma Kapalilua, Kona Hema, Hawaii (A collection of historical accounts and oral history interviews with elder kama`aina fisher -people from the Kapalilua region of South Kona, island of Hawai`i). Kumu Pono Associates. The Nature Conservacy. 2003. Meha, John. He inoa keia e Liliu / E ke Kamalei hiwa a Kalani (mele). Mele book of Liliuokalani. Liliuokalani Collection. Bishop Museum Archives. 1870. Paishon, Emma. Kawaihae! ka uapo a`o Hilo / Hoehoe na waa (hula). Mader Collection. Bishop Museum Archives. ca. 1930. Pa`a Pono Miloli'i, Miloli'i-Ho`opuloa Community Development Plan, September 1984 Pa`a Pono Miloli'i, 2011 Miloli'i Lawai`a `Ghana Camp. 2011. http://www.miloliilawaiacamp.com/paa/paa_pono.html Pukui, Mary Kawena. Interview with Joseph Ilalaole and Mary Kawena Pukui. Bishop Museum Archives. Date Unknown. Shackeroff, Janna M. and Larry Crowder, Traditional Ecological Knowledge, Oral Histories, and Historical Information: Reef Fisheries in Miloli'i, Hawaii. Duke University. MCBI. 2004. State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Fish and Game, Fish Transect: Miloli'i Bay, Honolulu, 1971. State of Hawaii. Hawaii Register of Historic Places File 10/65/7352; Historic Sites Division State Department of Land and Natural Resources, 1974. Honua Consulting PO Box 61395 Honolulu, HI 96839 T: (808) 392-1617 F: (888) 392-4941 watson@honuaconsulting.com Miloli'i Community Enrichment and Historical Center 123 Final Environmental Assessment - May 2012 Bon' agfi niag & llea^e,aPa;e9`-aa5 COUNTY O F H AWA I' I DEPARTMENT OF PARKS & RECREATION 3 3 n _ 101 PAUAHI STREET, SUITE 6 HILO, HAWAII 96720 / PHONE: 808.961-8311 / FAX 808.961-8411 MILOLI'I BEACH PARK u ff ACCESSIBILITY IMPROVEMENTS JOB NO.: PR-4469 MILOLI'I, SOUTH KONA, HAWAI'I TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 LANDOWNER: STATE OF HAWAI'I MANAGEMENT JURISDICTION: COUNTY OF HAWAI'I (E.O. 2435) MAYOR WE DIRECIOR owl � 5LAND MAP LOCATION MAP GON5ULTANTS BOW ENGINEERING & DEVELOP CH. - 2 H `7•/l SIB[RESr< Er, SnE PH -A H.—1WW i 98826 1E. Rrrs: I-E NI/(1E_O) FFLEMING & ASSOCIATESS, INC. 55 aunurrxNO E, "JER'sn cis. rx xr:ai owo 9�su NP.GABINEu01UWArENUGTNEE.S ING. Ervoirvexwrvat o LLLL' ZF= Z F W - W _ i W CID yJ o Q CNa d�;✓ ,., M + �. F PROAV MHAW IN N I x�Ex� QNOJ J xr,N• ON ECS INC. J W -- '""� PROJECTro MCINNY Sx rrArw x Noww Hn i s��Ee psi �ix� mi�m c C.rmx ��wcx�1 O EJL _ EJL Q ° 3s SNINS M ENGINEERING, INC. IN N —111 ILACE �« Exx�xEEx�xo, o AOSIN TSOTSOMI & ASSOCIATES, INC. a o A LJ a nor ra sr" SHEET INDEX ABBREVIATIONS NOTE ALL ABBREV Mav NOT NnuE BEEN usEo. MG R CONTRAST AD NIC NOT IN ANCHOR BOLT ED iaN Da NUMB US AGO SOA,E crerTr AEG AD�ACFANBLE ON Ea 'DIM) AD AD ENT GFOI 0 AFTO AMEW I N 1HED ILF01 CONTRACTOR N- CR�GEAFE NOTED STALLED ALUM ALUMINUM ON OVEN�ERANN anE oral auED OPEC OPEN PC BE BRAND PERIM PERIMETER DPEETP LINETO BUNG BLOCING IS BE. PICAT PRECAST BIG' BOTTOM PC AS PC FAB ` PAT I PLAN BETWEEN IMT PIVEMENT OEM CEMENT R RAN US DO " N 'FACE ED 2NMC `1' CESSIGNIGICINI El EIPANSION JOIN' "IT 'DUST N IF C ROOF N LC UVALI'CAL END POUNDS ENCL ENCLOSURE S, SCALE A UAL SOLID CODE DDT DDR CESSATION CATION LI DR RD DDEAll EEL FEET 11 FEET FLO FEELING D IRON EMPNEEE HE HEAD LOW TOP OF HIKQ TOPIC LONZITAU H.LDEI I HEIGHT DIAMETERIS INSIDE (DIM) IN INCH US GO -L NcworD of wcwDiND TEEEwist NOTED 1. INVER' oNT IF WITH TO NT ON' °SET /o Bo,c Pngmeeeiug & 111ET NOcE"Ereal DE5CRIPHON OF DMANNO 51EET NO BEGGARING OF DREARINGA TREE SHEET I E�GZNGCGTRQL AND DEMOLITION PLAIN 67 —1 AND DETAILS PACT 7 - MINE PLAIN B�NS Delapmeutluc. LI P�o�.. reoe, sr.-eesa AN R DEB A TO I I CRT 'EARN' FREE NI PLAN PLUMBING 12 13 COSTS OWED AFDGEWEP LATERAL PROFILES 72 IRI R 73 POSTS NOTES. I 3SEW u� 0 gff - AR M�l ELECTRICAL CG16 COURT PLAIN AND DEFAULI 71 EGl TE 71 E02TO ELECTORAL 11—L FIT SENEGAL NOTED ELECTRICAL MINE PLAIN 'A 21 '1 MMAPMOLUDN .3 EG- PEELIGN ROOF ELECTRICAL PLAN 24 A-2 EPDPNE/NEG ATE PLAN . E.CTI ELECTRICAL DETAILS 27 AS 3S COMFORT 5TAT ON - ROOF PLAN & EATER OR ELEVAT ONS IS GET 'TAT DO 11 OFF DEFFAIL p= AS - ED o W W=m W < a a� =w J Lu m m W J V% W Q U o c$ EL Q o 13 D� SCHEDULE TIRES ILS 14 D3DE" STATION KCE�BIL11 P� 35 — DA D4. DETwE E - NG rEDDE PLAN CMNMNNN CEILING PLAN DEMD DN 37 D4 - ENsNNNEEENDTIONS DN=,DEMD ONREARD -IF AN 4,5 OFEI EN, ,TYPE5 ly—, IEN ICHERULE PLAIN TCPE, a ME "PEC & DETAILSO DECUL5 _DOW50 ASSET 5 ASCESSIBILITY FLO P PLAN � DETAILS — CARICTIPAL 13 Sol 1 COMFORT STATION FOUNDATION AND FLOOR PLAN 51 Sol A NOTES FOR GENERAL CONSTRUCTION: I ALL CONSTRUCDON MR' IS 10 BE CONSTRUCTED IN ACCORDANCE YAll 'HE CONSTRUCT o 'N .... ADD IS AMENDMENTS AND �SF DIED DETAILS FOR PUBLIC 'HE MAEDEPARTMENT OF T" uE (s) BUSR To, IAFTER EACH IANFALL BEEN' ITS CONTRA 101 IIALL REMOVE ALL � L' 'A�N FACILIDES PASHAVOCCE AND OFFER AREAS "' 'ACT N ... ED THIN ANI N,1111­ EICESS SATEA INCLUDING SILL AND OFF STAFF NO' BE ALLOWED 10 RUN-OFF HE OF IIERTY, ACCEPTANCE OF E PROJECT e T ANo/oR wORu DUALF ADD RERFOR V ED. ON CH IN' DIECTS FILE COBFURACTOR TO WOOD ADDLONAL ALL, BE e APERCME rare CouNns cos ENIENC) sTaLL BE EM BEAT IANANEMENI HIMP ILSIP) AT ALL DIME1 TO 'HE OF FIIEPC LEE PLATE OF 'ASSA IT IF E)(ECEM CONDINIONS REDUCE NGN-EVERCENGI NICE' "ME MR' oN (SEn ""N'HE B� !MINIMUM LOI TE slMRs M allo DIl ireERD ICODOwSLNwaaos eO ITI[Lo[o HE CONTRACTOR FILE ToR)RON ( Ss EASE STTPToOuo D ADD TRANSPORT AN, PAT',IVEED B IDSUTOSn ON FA, I" FILE 'AGES, ANE FALL SENTE, AT I GRUBBING. GRADING A: STDCKPILING NOTES: AND PLO 'OIL, N'AU CAT AN lPGlF NO z PERMPI BE RE cRAomLL COMMENCE UNTIL .BE DEPARTMENT or PuOIL woRus fDPw7 aPRwEs A c PEreMIT. 4 L"E'GIONTRACLOR, 9 115 PON DEFENSE, 5EMLL DEEP 'HE PROJECT AND SURROUNDING AREAS FREE RULED OF 'HE STATE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH FAR FUCINVE DUCL STANDARDS ADD GUINELINEC OF 'HE DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORNA COUNTY OF 1AVESS, 5, 'HE CONITESSFOR STAFF POP OF PLAN' ALL 5LOPE5 AND EIP05ED AREAS IMNEDIATELI AFTER FILE GRADING WORD 'AS BEEN COMPLETED. e s E�SEC RE AND/ore AND/OR BORROW STES) MUSTEALSO FULFILL 'TE REQUIREMENTS or TIE GRADING 9 NO GRADING GORE SIALL BE DONE ON SAUURD­ SUNDI COUNT' FURLOUNI D­ AND 10. FILLS STALL BE COMPAG EO TO AIL PERCENT (so%) or MARIIMUM DENSITY PER ASUM D-1557'EST. IE PS)VAT BE uNcovEa(CN g, ALL aa 2)MR' STnLL BEHALL CEASE NOTEiEo THE IMMEDIATE AREA ADD 'HE DLNI, 11 GRI IS D AND/oR L AN, THE DGAB NOTE: BO{c Bn¢m-Nag & lle�-elapmeut. luc. 1-1151 �_� `� eouNOAacvreExP. a L♦�♦ �� soeure ♦ ZONE X � �EAcre 1 7 111 N 9 i COMFORT_ I \ r STATION � WATER / TANK / I BENCIMARI PARKING SUMMARY 16 1— STALLS IN �d � 20NE" VE �. (ELEV. 10) reoPEren ENE ,w - e 0 l0 0 PAVILION I � BASKETBALL COURT 1 B. Eug.,un g & � U) z ~ J PLAYGROUND 1=°"' \ W ® w„ ` ¢ a R. w .,,-OUI ROAD (GOVERNMENT) ♦ - d g - z ♦ c eve � L-U Rk m U) ELLA 11 MILO- wery �J W e �AIL U a ZONE AE ,: zt Q o (ELEV. 1) — GRAPHIC SCALE: GENERAL SITE PLAN = o I'lloi . -O ,- o o U BEST MANAGEMENT PRACTICE NOTES: INAFALLEGGCONSIRUCLED PRIOR L STAULL OF D DEPOL111ON WORD a. ILL CONIFACCOR S ALiL FFE°uErvILvHwEs GRADED AREAS c°r�wniER IFUcu are NosE. CAPAeamES, CONFRACIOP SHALEm ISSA A WIND MEIER ON E°AC CALL UMEs.PR"core I "E "N"A"' "ALL MP- ALL `MPG N FOOD W` ED NO CROP GCT F REPAIR A "ALL FIRE AND PFNIDE e, CCVER AS ACON AD PRACr CAL AEER FINAL GAG Na. �E oRRM GAVAL OF aaNs GROUNDORALL RE �eJ LEGEND. E CAN ® AA� aNoNOALI FENCE X °EMCLSu SIR CIURE ® OEM@LLsp,W --► FLEW / 1ECLECTLE LEER EA°11 AGO'COPES CLI & PLUG SPOT -ER LATERAL AT EPA IF STABWZED CONSTRUCTION ENTRANCE I NOTES, U RGE OF SE IF NO FAILEI ADD LOCI z RECREA'oN. o wP LA M 1 ANx PAR EC C LOAND 1-1 PECACN PAT eE'ECERUNEo ev _IECCOR CO OR ESF ° aC ,viv.RA. cRAU No , , N L L PE eLLs ° RED, R :Asti RoMPIRCEDA°°r ER FILL E FARE ERALsECI ECR RE°sEND CNE AN °Rs °NS N ERE EEL _t li EOP"1G� RE�CG,A I°° ,° � N E I I _ ROJE� s �Cn. i _ °x ;M , ANE,E R S QL AS pER ED i1CONFRACLOR NEEDS FIG ACCOMMODATE AL L.NEEISED IIINANIIND PA I All ACCESS NEE°E°.RR° R ANON OF A CAROL I AND REMOVE Ell - WOOD SIAGE `.'.. is °A AND '°ANsl4°R Exs.�ANL°N REMOVE FREE, O EA Exs..aEEs o =CN 16 E II M o°REMAN ED K��_. WA CREMaN —E-- r °NR P .ERE —.� > zCC°NSTRUSDON ESENFE EE _ NET, L A J k; i � l EROSION CONTROL AND DEMOLITION PLAN ED n±"^ IC SC c AS CIA BO{c agi -IGg & 1) c 1Gpm t. IS,. cn z w w y YO Qa a� z xF w J wm m U) J (n Ow J U �Q PARKING SUMMARY LEGEND: Mo -_. --- Ts 'ANIAN VAAgNG A ow s RosT. D sTULs z' Pe PAVEMEM aN OI axv sEE DETQ - sa m' EMNT +' BoTeEugu�eeeiug& � acCE4 eLE HALL 0 C' ensE muRsc Tme sMARING STENCIL PRovFn-[ouA �R - vPx PceEneLE T COEs Ts TmaL sPLLI 1' Co NE OFF ow RT 6' ensE OFF EC a s cDNCRETE ow LATE, 676i s _ �042' �-a b 672 0 0 4' D SE 4 .— 'hx, - "NliN IGIFI d WE AS 4' CONCRETE i t J 5' B ll�[ Tg 6]] T vna�<. eoe sn easr SEE 20. 18 5 m 6.84 __ _ m Awrc ° d 1 eA .a KT g� sf o au "' b 2a 7 n`s= E ENCE,SEE °�o�o t Rn 1 c DER, a. Ya x6,71 e E 1 /� eG 8 ° 111 U���'fS a / D[T. ° k 9 I. 6 4' WIDE EAC -PA F-� ° o oob bw `V R 1EE TN?Ri (3)� 9 `4: 001 �o P�LI�N � � L, :� J` za �qf a1 w p st co3.1 11 fable 697 1 FL, J ° 6.86 tw - BASKETBALL COURT _.. - m I� _ I 64adw o 0 694 sss .04 .. PLAN,VIC°. FOP ENLARGED PLADF ALI � - 0 e I SV - ruv.6d9 Povemen _RE MRSABLE SE _ �. "� C r \ ' I PL) ` .... 5p� 1T50 a I 71i�A_ 7V, LNE Tvwv s r I � 1 a �s , A. . w� A.- 3 NOTES: ATIO _ sEN. 7 < I s CONC e al Ra C LIP " LINE uR SECURE cuT FREE TRUNKS T. zTs `°nr PssP' .. PROPER" .6z co f . 1 b __ ADSIDE o _ a4 LU \ 7 (\ e PLAYGROUND j a 3,y z: / f 5 ib bW: a W �. Z 0 WATER e ^,,., 9< ,6� NO PARKING \ s TT .-TANK J ( -' d= BOAT 1URNAFOUND w - Y p d ND PARKING 66 _ E ADD PAD I �- TURNAROUND EEE=ne ' m ( — — 80A1 J4 " t _ tr m W o SECURE SITE S 'n. - sEE No r ( _ - p f --i o'vnn,RE-aRArErcaNM 586- I i e TREE TRUNKS NOTE 4- o e e i — syl9P,9+c, xp. 6E72 No ea 1 T, TURNAROUND AAVEMEw 617 3 Z.. F MILODI ROAD (GOVERNMENT) MPRQRTlTENCL oR 668 tw ° d ¢ J_ ,' y AREA Tw aN. GOVERNMEN�TAROAD '1 __ __ — •675 vED_uy� 1 6034 631 bwDo $ - a a ucK -71a 794'1i s� ___ GRADEa3zs NK EE Q AND T SEE____ — —_ CONE. LEADER WALL 4.5 T.0 1N715 ed e of ov men( J LIl PLONK RR PERry e rc LNE L _ a3 o. 6.07 0 - 831 7.0/ 677 6.16 6 J U o e€ SEE DETE ;- ` -2 tw 1026 I"" 1002 bw 1280 fw ELEV l91STA. MISS)6 91 5.59 5.48 \ 2 Q o 0 N2 bw wall 7 b t�5bw 1290 tw 8.50 bw \2 PIPE rm w m _. a Fn A GRAPHIC SCALE r ~ 9 onur s O .. 694 A 1 D SITE PLAN — 1 U Q> PARKING SUMMARY LEGEND: NM , . O VAAKING s O s ens[ mugs[ I aNV NO 5 Posy us of* 5 RE �s .mu sins 0 a ensl couRsr 12 x is I s nse � srT 4t-b° 660br i��. r694 724, — 528 iw 1623 4 t 514 bw s "' "' r . 2.53 \ 653 Iw 429 II, 481.81 bw zao9 82 b a' hc�rssla/ O 1ha PI�LI .11 owns - .-. TMK: (3) 6-9-004: 016 M .,. 6 YIrvc J3 bw \ 643 1055 Iw 7,35 bw N w 50 d= I 10.58 Iw ELEV _ EIISr 818 6 6B3r �ylg6 h -. 1 DOUBLE SWING GALE R + n,I (et -_ con 1108 tw r6.]6i ` rock wall 9 108.P o 09I 9415� Z835w I - 677 _ pi" 0s e 3 44 _ --745 v 6.5 cb 70SL / -. °_50 6.84 a h to )4 731 .p Pos( 3"" an 1, 6.8a 7,661( a _ yellow/tee ,tea � - _ SITE PLAN — 2 as 3 3 =g EA 1� 11 I I110 I LING I 1 I o — u) 1 Z N 6.67 Iw 533 bw I 8 LIJ , W z i Q ° J —j— ¢a a� om x> z Q J f W m [0 32'30 u) - u) 20.18 O U o =€ �Q �s o N SI O U Bonl[-Eug.-niTg & uEND DRANUNE uY 8 o I T :r' D- I pmeut I. p e 6.77 a i h,50 &84'PPLNLlNf a °a I ALA I 5� \ 20. 18 eow sn eesa ld s I a I Irv, =m II `Y I'SLA, Do'6J1 . -5g \ ll LII BE.DlA��F6 fA bw (3) 8 9 004: 0 NE A 6 \ p SEPiC Ti-- S_0-0_ }5,9➢ `., stOB 662 - _ I jronlnl i -.9J a (able 6.N-4,74 TILE97 19] 686 1.T BASKETBALL COURT n TO RErMN� JI s. J d s%774w _ ' 1, 694ET A. T -'- 1 E5IG4422� ] _ 1-37,04 Ec%NN T TO 12'o E/11 119, RpYe•,ryp / 04 8 0 PIT AND D, 0 e = — PLUG E PLUS fsq =EE e �N ; DRrvNENE ✓ •719 TA w, w 1i �q91 �✓q 1 �: 6 � 642 bw �ND Drtn Enl ' ,70f .—,� OMFO n i_ — ,TIC 68 1 xATIO V - ti 6 - 3 Toe T� 22— c 749 N'S.19�` F 841 U W Q _ 7 0 6.52 tw p : = a d 1 \316 bry ; q IYATER c. NO P IN o 0 pNA G DO spDN = I 'v=o NO PARKING 66 g0A1 TURNAROUND ,' Tw PAD --�a,-5. �'- --_-_ 1URNAROU6D _ �O o o�ERExc v TE A � I — _ _ s - ¢ � aoA a / — -- o✓e owN�D� 0 - - r vE TON r 7.03 6.72 6 17 6 < _ .86` NILOLII ROAD (GOVERNMENT) ,6.21 668 tw d Q Fn_ �- T GOVERNMEYJ�2Bt0AD •----- 7T 10 —� 122_i4 631 bw _s; W�gO na de of o JW 07hG61A 15 ment 7.01 Ve6n 6,02 6.16 6 DU — - - 559 559 546 1280 fw PfA. MILD 6 U __ •T 'S �> 8.50 bw ELEV.=].91 Q ° § /2 PIPE LE 11 GRAPHIC SCALE' _ M ., 694 A ] = UTILITY PLAN _,D- SCALE --10 eea o EARTHWORK SUMMARY LEGEND --EV. 65 i.m b65- 1 1.-EmAwnON - ez c,v. z' a PnvEMEN, ON svO, ESEvasioN EL 6.83r V�1� qp 6.BB Bon-Eugu,eeeiug& 0 s ens[ mugs[ �� MAG HUB _ �� 643 b aDED/ Y ENsu ORaOE mN,Oue >533 - . FOR PERM, PURPOSES ON/v u- ensE inures[ Eu,s or area✓ Nc .�g56 I. a 6.76, 75 v ••� sY 57 0 4 e/sE co, INu.SE M� Row DREG, ON -,3 B e.�a 09�7.07 r �I°f�l g DevelOpmeut, I.,J F 677 11ICKENED EDGE BASE " d 3 4 °7,71,' l Ia 1(�4 20. 18 1-1 noel sn eess bra Mp,ICh1�1NE ffs,srrcc,15o­2"_ - ia's z ' I :OP° •Lj �'� o F 3 jUP s.l ss� i i 6. 688 . /}ast < aNE o ', I i 80 I" .� �o�t B5 (EoE 2 SO,'(i. x6,71 xP�l.s Q� a 1 1 m I^ ° deck it �421w sw03 d \ s1e "'ITED �� cOuesE , - LIh BEACH PA B P 7,01 ood , 1 0 9 bw DM'a �¢s PEI - 04: 001 • w ,. coas ' � F � � ° (3), 8-9 0 - za.a • Agst _ BE CE ) 81 A. , APPECA,oN� FpoIEAD P ( E mmnEDHEaoc[PA I 1.tl .,662 6 p o I a% I �97 o f bIA 617 ,197 7 �.NE'NU cONcre re. 1. TOP sO BASFFE-KETBALL COURT J J7,47c °I 6 7;;i1 6F___� ll-ENUB ED duN. d rvx� Cr a zs P LA i o zoo - LB ol_ o o , ° �r r p _ ----- m _ 9� x I .- -�. 3 , P4siasr7 IN a7.� a � c � col Cl-711 ".. le 0' S 7 t B i712 8 I � ♦ �� ROPERTI iNE w _ I co3o II Posf, _ J, N' ;Op Pre_a _ -v F OMFO > y - - -. - IC13 � j7, ESE. 3 \7�s tw r.5 ATIO U 1 � � z .axxt I. I.Is 2B Iz D2� .- -c- - o___�___�' 7 b ..., F BC r Z L^h PLAYGROUND .0 s2 tw LU Z WATER l 3,16 bw a" W J . . s /� 7.0t N PARKING z AL 7,33 .-TANK B _ `� NO PARKING 66 BOA101URNA80UND \ _ 0 o Z o 1 PAD �, - 80A1 1URNARODND -, - a Bc� - -._� 6 d4 Q .z o _ a B.13 EGA e o Pa✓emeot +� -38G ` _ % 9 C7 20 y - cr e.al. 13af 7 12 e 703 6 72 �� 6 17 }' /.. ]7NNE ON 621 ♦ 668 _ QJ U e.z, T RNMENI)o •- ---- - LU MOON DNc co , 07 675 4 1 $ �� - - _ MILOLII ROAD (GONE v1 t0 9 , ��.. - - U) 1 >, dJ 07hG61N] 15 ed e t i` jIg I) ��. JLu ± - 850011.6w STA. M119 6 7.01 sE,Bocu g 6ULMIN 616 5.48 O Q o Et 12 PIPE _ _ r p = GRAPHIC SCALE: �^s .-.� ', � 694 • coin o � �� GRADING PLAN — 1 U D r-,v Jig EARTHWORK SUMMARY LEGEND: 11 01 0 RRI 11 110T E,EVaGNI - FOR PERMIT..RauaaosESYON,v s muasE s ens muresE 0 a easE couRIN uuns orareaDiNc oue M� aow DIRECTION �-44-ro� r. s�.uwr-r.�r-ter. r.r.r-ter. -ff m— r r - 6.6/ - 7.20, r —r —r r r r ,694 16J8 (w S28 1w p!W r s 0.91 1057 tw 82B bwTS'N9"'-'--'�--�r,r-"`-� 5,14 bw r - 151 1004 IN wall 727 b, ./ 1 tw '721 620 tw r ,',4 bw 3c \ F tw .2 5816 8bW---- _ � .II 6 / ". 11361 38 6bw \16 632 tw -' -- 627 bw 686 11, 4 434 bw 146 w J2 UC w R f cut (!d) 7,02 t 54 bw E7, OR 576 PC FOR IGNI .yam 0 1 s TMK: (3) 8-9-CD4: 077 76 P -. as e77 1 1 iTERPC11RN[ s \� re.S5 IN _ 7,35 bw 0 rk(1 ZONE x 11 IRE I 8,18 bw x mt ef) 1 61 tI` 7. 1 bw ,676, E - 1f08tw - -- i � , $ rock '"all 9 ZEE toa.P q 30. 'nee 44a a� Sa 5 ➢ 6.9 ch '7/ib& / 7 1 1 9 6 4 s- hW_TCi1.41�F->4 7,37 2,vosf' 72� � 1 zaa d 1 s ® joP sZz , w�� 68 7,61. yellow lie 9 i GRAPHIC SCALE: 0 GO GRADING PLAN — 2 DIIALE r-,0 B. Bugu,ee,iug & Uece....... , luc. 603 bw 6 43 � ZONE V - [E,EV O) � 6.LU 67 1w 3.83 brv1 9 2 : LU z Z J •• 6,56 688 tw ,N E, nP - 0 CL CD ��. _ tr a ¢71 o Z o D: z x> 6 -20,18 0" Lu m u I�1 18 O Lu I 20. O C) J w€ = a lrl m w z � O U TREE MAINTENANCE TABLE` CDTREE NUMBER IDENTIFIEF IRONN PRUNNI REMBUE TREE NEE MmcanoN BEBUBEB B. E g.,—Bg & D—lop—t, I., 23� 33 32 24 _25 �,w TsE 26 n ate : 34 3s \ W 0 _ r� 26 35 �_— W 2121 ,F-.. Y 0 if ca ri c TREE MAINTENANCE PLAN 20 ,o o zo rn- 5.. eWU 40 B. Eug.--g & 10 10 10 0 AH CNALE xi rv. n . .. E n creaoE P E s vP. --- - Uevelopmeut, luc. vo<. ,eoe, sn—eesa 9 E ox m oa NVE vp. o [F iw- . a oRa �O o DFAINLINS 0 o o � o 5z P� 0 4 14 0 0 61 0 —p 0+00 1+00 1+2s0 —p 0+00 0+2E — DRAINLINE Al PROFILE DRAINLINE A2 PROFILE w ' 10 10 g J FINISH EVP O 3 En=, I—. creaEE. Em e J w cauNcr i H H J = L z LU LIE, w o wo. =px YO — G a� �< _ ° Z+g x}} 0+00 0+25 Q J 2 SEWER LATERAL A PROFILE S m m i , - -_ N e IEE. 2 J L a G GRAPHIC SCALE: o a 1 IS U INSIALL sEE "RESERVED 5arexiNc s}, > L) x v. �w- � Bon-Eug.,,,nug & SEE os. cogs rv35 r-749 'wNoPAB `v1eLN R Pos,. 5 EV RESERVED PnRaNc Developmvs mN s11sE NcWP v sa io° o� uwD. Ps. srwPmc E a PnuiuoN m is a E irwEUL nN ssaN asNLE +o }o » o} ¢o p o sKID E[ o 'LIN SBL�S��LERN- :N�o v� O D ov C 5"w0.; NSoogi n NO TI roua� 39 _ - a YaEE' ESERVED PARKING O oAAKING s AN IN cm.s a Es oa ms - y I� INSTALL ANV O a r _ 7— I ND V o CCESSBLE SipLL' M� 5 5 0� y^ 8 ENLARGED PLAN 2 ENLARGED PLAN s u z w .a w p'r LU = a w o > ow fr cc ED U _ w w Fn J 2 co $ w OJ U �Q �s O GRAPHIC SCALE: N a U I'll- .. Bon-Eugu,—Ug & n�ioN "ICa easrcreuL caum cEsseLL s, Paakwc wsE IIISM RILI ICIIIIILI ECO'Ll N Development, luc. E xiEr. crenoE. ,vP. f v�o�<. reoeE sn-eesa EINIEN OPADE. 1P. e� uar onnieM� w av �w. ao R s a2 ensE COURSE P. '_�� ^�"ee SECTION A ELE: - ,D DASE D- COURT P—POUND LPNE �" II PER � I a ENN4EcStE , _Er EnwPODN ON aNEE .NEN. WLL p s U EE"E: -'° z z _ _= w p'r w O a� _N w J wm P$ m N J w 1 IC o O GRAPHIC SCALE: � M a U 1 A.C. PAVEMENT DETAIL ,wEEN NEW INS Rs L22. ;._G.ASLONG a R IE , 4 /- 4 1/2' �21­ALL GLEN nN AT 12 / 2 ME 11PR RERAF -O LONG Nf1fF 2 ,GL,, DATED APAL 6, 2009E W S NTINU WA(SEEAPIPIJ) SAID" 6 PAVEMENT %1 CONCRETE WHEEL STOP DETAIL � NOT TO STAIE & NOT ,O SCALE 2 `N TNTT AT O SEASEE PLAN) ATR TOILED EDGE _ ll IL EINLILL GRADE LOPE SORGRAOE COURSE THICKENED EDGE CONCRETE WALKWAY DETAIL WALEAAl 6 (SEEPsi R I" ILASLE P ENENT O LAO AT IF 11 Cl FALSE NET OF 10 NOT,O STALE a FILTER 8 TV: I 3/4' TO 1112" re TRAN Ens. m ,wcxNEss AND QUAL "'NEW BO{F EBgm,,,FGg & AG. nwSAICULT PT Tl SITE sss(NG ), _12 AP CONCRETE. STATE °N 111.1I%E s DESIGN Mll IV ON I" E� 'T D,,IApp.,nt. IS,. C_ EIRET AGO 5; NEW IIIIEAI FALSE COURSER"' BASE TR2A„ESSPRIME 11MERAD AT°(ARMN` o> CIE %1 SMOOTH RIDING CONNECTION DETAIL � NN TO SGLE 1/2 l(FLED a RANIlISAR, CONT. TO 1/4" 6k6" HEADER wDR aomT sEUECONTROL JOINT A / LI la: �' /L Ca :1 la:. �� V NET TO CALL A: 1 PA OF ALL I 'PUT COCAN TO SUED R 2 1/2FIINIISI ' OR.E EO' � ° f, /R' LONG OF I BOI SETS ID 3/W` TIN O � a 21. PSI i� ,r Oin' TOP ANO P E FEET DPI NET ROTTDW SEC. FG(YTING REJACIII POST 8 NOT ,O 52,AE a RRE CEsIED ET' IELLOw u) oa 0 = YO —pa RE GROWN TO BRED WATER IS v Q J m N FOOT NO OU J s R. 0o Ps —U g Q , _ � O 18' NO� SEE EQ51 DETAIL go NO, TO SCALE U i pose i-BEEPAIL 0 EYE TOPR� (. ./. �vnaEE END ,p f '/a[ T/C 'IE SLIEL, DEC SAFE ITUR uNx DARK c z T/e' CC i pie Ee/ EppE earvo nr I o.c.u piss Ee ED ENT/� L ,E APED ReoICY 1111LE m; FIRST (nPa* Exprays�ortl SLOPE. CORNER. EN 1111E_P.QSI OR PNLL POST nags: 40 (STANDARD WROTE) PIPE. I TOP CUT C.=LIHILLLIE'EL="WE�DHNEIE-L OF LINE POW, 4 TOP OF CONCRETE FOOHNS STAFF BE CPMNED 10 SHED WATER, CH 0 NLIN FENCE — 6 FOOT HIGH L BE POST HE WITH POs/e'A I. K AT HU'.E/o AHTR4TcocR. (22]LB/n)� RON Im U 12 0— AS SALAOF I vscEE— FIRS ��I LINE POST mENc FDOTNc � TuwNeucx Es (eEn� EBcsunTTaM SLOPE, CORNER, END 3 CT �0 S LI FE CE — 4 FOOT HIGH STEEL W RE AT za o.c. ' s/s aD ANo PAR v .Hp sT s/a' o PAR S AT BRPCE (ss� pie./n ) Hogs: SAGE PLATE IN 111H uMESH A 10" METAL RICK FARE "C DATE z.�12 pipE. szss spEcinEo ARE oAMICE oinMnERLIN, llHEouEE ao (srn on o WEIGHT) FITINGES FOR CAIN FROMEC MAY BE USED IN LIEU OF ING E SAFE aRTALL HGAE KNUCKLED SELPAGE TOPCROAND BOTTOM, o wa,EaEEo LItlE..P9:I 2 4 FOOT WIDE GATE DETNL CC TD sE NNUNU FENCE. pROpER LINESEE PLDET(' PAVEMEMS I THICK DOES, CAP PROPERTY .R OF CLASSDUR-0— pB' C0NA RIES pA OTHER uasE- 14 PONT, AT 14 O.cTELL W" 4 NOT ,0 SCPLE I s/a' aA pip ere (zzT Ea/n.) CENTEouDROF wOFE�E E POST 1 BE p 4 ACT THROUGH ARROW CENTER 6 P oEME T OW DEf IL a41 14 0.0. DOW ALL CELLO o OF AND 3" CIA WEEP HOLES AT 2� BID OR, ROCK COW, YORG Ma CONT. m r BO{e Pn¢iB CnR¢ & D—lapmeEEt. IS,. Euu cE for bxMICA1 r"^nEre ;oIN R 1: I PIP'/e o �\ MITER domT'LIDe w/ FEE TOP GO , ED FUEL OFF Gj=-�- ME ABOUT UNLESS 011EPWIGE ,INIsl FISH EMEreuNE olrn,Eo J GENERAL NOTES: 1. H o STEEL. SUED — OLEO �:e me EomlNcs E FALLING ANN ARaN roe EACH GaTELLow UNDERGROUND TULIPS i 1 TYPICAL PIPE GATE DETAIL i%i Pa Rye/ex,/P i,s ''aePpED. x FRAME ,-�/e G.o. x PI EEIE ,-I/lOP OF. PIPE PCEE-111 DITAL '� sEcnoN �c' ore -w/e Gw x 3/4" LONG a P DROPGRODD o. PIPE 1/2' CROWN TIEFEL oETFumOD PIPE/a Eo_a.TI FARE E,AL gape G PIPE 2RG3/e'GOD. PIPE SLEEVE BAR 3/3 x 1/4 H 1PLAENW xSSG. 1 EGGTING ,e, COTTau E LRER TO r J ELE�IAII4N 3/11 re"ORe ° ON r o D��. S�EIEIL S QUALL 3 Na, TG sIALE GATE FRABE (MAICI TOP wreONo�. EENFI) o --T" o Pe (PLUS MEMBERPIOF aaE FRAME GNLI) w,w c.vE. cre. Eo w CSNc. Rues GET FA 1-i� Pos (Tmj uwttPPawx R EGuaw - GENERAL SLOPE OF OF GOT 'INGE e—R III,I cR THE caouN DIALED SEE DET m e Twcu coNC. sue GTHERWISE IND GA EG wELOEo4ERO Paws O. COLOR oNc. sue ICI Tw_ coNc Era 1as ALE P05T FACT sEcnoN 2-7/e"GGIA FENCE POOL Pl�ci BELOW %1 TYPICAL GATE POST FOOTING FILL PIPE PGs e' /� DIED PGs e D. PIPE >I ,-T/a' G.G. x GIN E AR 3I1/2 1 o as GATTE —,-�/e G. LONG �EOe aPcNRGussETNPE o. s z-,/e,. INBE B L PIPE wELOEo :O ,/ aw - -3/e o.o. PIPE 3-3/' (CATE FEE - ,-Ue" M.G. x LONG ELEVATION - BOTfON HINGE L a PBAR EPGM mED sloE1/e 1-T/d' TWO ,pa mn ROLES BAR/r C CLLDED TO GIE/PGEGLL GFEc WITH (ROR E9GT HINGE GLGN, GA POSTIF, P n ,-E OFF, x Y ,ALL Te a ouo j2"AaaR % j/ FULL RLLFzo �M IlI _ANI WE _3N /PPEPOOL SWING / s a Eea o. PIPE R'9G aMumE omhLWanwumc omhOw s PDA,111/2 — b BOtc agineeeiB¢ & lout, lleoEe LIT"'"'9t L Bon' Pn¢ineeeiu¢ & ER TIE oRicmwE mNomoN ERADEm NE ere ouNTERSUNu oowNSPou, � RE oOWNSPou, —FOR D—lap—t, IS,. COURSE P�o�.. reoeT sn-ees, TAPE Suv:Ei IDENTIFICATION To u v SEocu ✓ X� �� ,/e SEND IPE [xrnvanoN P ILE N(EOR NOPN t/8 PENND o> REOUNED;«= s cE D ,RAARND NEEDED 3 so SEE z AN ALM GRANULAR P RE REDDND TYPICAL TRENCH SECTION 2 CLEAN OUT TO GRADE DETAIL 3 NDT,Os E NI (NEENAl FRINA°:`'REDR`AEA3 DD PN OR APPR�D E ,x SLOPE DN REomREMENTDO TN�II.ATMUIIAI TR (MEAURED FROM ,DP ODND DN INI FRAVEL AATE,)) BE OXATENATPAR .REw AoE�D.ETER "/.11= F a (IS) R,O,RE E ° a E54CENGNE�.l EN E _ oSTAFF OUND o v PINTEITIVEc_ wuwvav, e DE 'AEE _ DRA INS- AND 9EDiMEM FROM [MERING Ex[AW➢ON00 DE,./.\ o NONE. y ND RA EA M DEP,R of DRAIN uNE C 1p. PPE DNDCATEDON PLAN oT % SON( AR�Es> A ° SLOPE z w SLOPE PARIES w MOVE UNTIL ACCEPTANCE OF FINAL PROJECT,ERoRFSEsON eocKSDSRED P RADE.w co A_ usE PRECART DDNaRETE coNE sEw�oN WlTHW RUNDs. °o° °o o°O°o°o°o°o°o° SE s. PUNS+ Tull PREcan lCNORETE MANIOLI SALE AND MORTAR a"�\/ �r� �I��� — AROUND DRAIN PARE. PRE—coNCRnE A Q�= Y x O NANAOEE wNE /. �1L�� -s<e (IfS ow a Z SECT ON PIPE OR EDUA a\ _A_ - 4 PIPE AT -'I,a o PE, � TIE a:J ='= U V AS Q J DIAMETER F, l 1 SIDEWALK UNDER DRAIN DETAIL C0 v 4 T ro SGIE NONOR To muff J W U EL �Q os o � M O RE U SIGNAGE NOTES: RESERVED DaDDODDED, AllAIMFAMEFA o ALLFILL ING 11- 11/P�o' F. TOLES PRE -DRILLED AT P9�,N LOYAE�OOELETTERS OF 11E 'PE APPROVED B� FIE B E.LL Orvre� BI�RONIOEwOEE�OBE rv. TOLD�A.EO AAry NO, ro nALE TO 1/2 /2 1-1 v2 VIFi areEicVIDI %1 HANDICAP PAVEMENT MARKING DETAIL SCALE: T/2' _ *- 12 �o PARKING ANY TWE 0 NDOPARKINQ ANY TIME SIGN DETAIL s/�e' uAcremE screEw a INLT BIDS, agm-iug & -EGA C LED Ew. scry IV BORDER NDUNTING DETAIL PARKING008 MIN, BINE s ElANAEF DecelB E 2LOP reap;-.`dsF",Bs°EE. wre�.E ArereOw Earea, 9„—a� ACCESS a s uL BE awe GENERAL NOTES: AISLE RA WALE SYMBOL � BOBBER , _ �� AAFPF'CCEL'CAANL'lDON OL �� o- ALESP s�a�� B B�OBwAY s�Orvs3=g NoA= %o�s "B "AEBBEBZ DrvESB.reErewIS O Eo1 s BO.B AA s sPEAIEIEO_ OR ADD BA�LLEB A, APP'lE AA.E �o�.W Y"'sTUBE -- AN11 A, POST 'A EMB 12 DA rvO. ,O =BALE B A P FLFINSDINSERT�Ory OF ,BE L SIGNPAs Ore R° EA,Ys BE ,ism AOLEs, ", Y-, s4 ADreL"�v,BPOLS (sA EE.w. ANcAorelOs 11 SIGN POST DETAIL %1 ACCESSIBLE ROUTE &SIGN POST DETAIL sOry POY OE AL rvO Es ASSURE EASY INSERTION OE,BE 2E1/4°sION POST RERFG FOR RMA ICrvB�.�O"ALLrvs ANO z B EAR POCKI A. ALL WCNS OC BE MWALLEO wi cOrvB. FOOTINGS. ' nM DETAIL ENO STALL z w eow a A w a� Zo- U Q J_ m m m N J N O W '2 J V ACCESSIRLE DIRECTIONAL Q ROUTE SIGN B. Eug.--g & uNu D—lop-Et, I., v�o�<. reoeE sn—eesa v�F9xeoo �✓ riNCE nrvo Posh ORDERreiviNG (rov 10 WILL aco BLUE SEEan eE FA encucre ALL. L-B RauNo coaNERs2 Q�a� ,� R ALL LINES ARE 2 ear oomz s r0 0Tg cIDE EN,ElLNEVP"F =4 IN .: cDETAreure�� RUVTOLAoRoa,oN , e ac oau EA«,l0«EreALL c«ssaILNARE,E COURT P z FOP reA=IE.BA« eo aoMs oNT A o k�����o oq DEALRE P 1'10 e m Vo«E)AELL NET POST DEPNL 03 ,o a a o�E�ON� € FO riNO BEVONO _ < v II I H KETBALL/VOLLEYBALL COURT MENT AND CURB DETAIL - NOT TO SCALE 2 N0, .0SCALE Lu r c ~ C N 2 t H Z = J i A: Ex` = p'r wIFIAVE w a (zAPAVF �NEre � reERE AIILvE ( - Y oEe pe611 OR 150 _ _ 12 a U v ENN'GreANE EDS _ `m U� $ _ J In < m P NREP AVIv" W �U cAUS EN otil..E ToEF E BASE IF SEA 'A" .. AT uNONc EocE aE C , Q v %1 PLA ?QRT RESURFACING DETAIL � NO.,o s<�E U CODE DATA ..... . ...... ... . ......... ..... . ...... IECC 2018 (D H oo LU LL < ABBREVIATIONS HTN E GENERAL SYMBOLS C-1) n.: :t.. (D LL GENERALNOTES DIAWI DOE I A =TN. EN. EN%lN&­LL EE A END A I IN GUE El THE 11 NTIAITII EE 11 RE E I E. T I A W W A I'llITN E D-NIE AND IEII `TIIN L I I L E OR E lLAl'L`=DN`N"TRATTV`E ALIT ET IID E I I I IIA 'T I E I , El E,I EEE ED I AND TIE A.ENIANE WITI NIGAIGHTEE AIT I T " EN T RANTTl A ITIl I " A ED I I TO E II A I ATND IT 'T, I I I ID1 E�,l I , A"N I AElE T I I E GO DO ENTE E I I T 'IN A, LND RE I v� I I ` ` 11" THE I RAW IN I I AND 11EI I=Nl INTIT".1 ININ.1 IT E D V NVE �N DIII.ENTE OR E I I I LDEE I D"ET AE TO NTE EA TIE IINTIAITII EIALL NITIll TIE A1111TEIT I..EDIATEI CATIN 11 NTE . . . ETATIN DRA NTG ND CA ETIR EVEN 0" DoO CCON 8 ETA ST R U IT I I W HERE I E LD Go ND T I I I W IDE N� AT ETG DT AREN I I I E GO RA ENT, lUT ARE I. E I TV R CHA RA CTER To THE'DETANLD AHOWN EDNIR DETAHE 01 CONETRUCTION EHAULCTloUWHElUllECT REV EW 11ROVAL 01 THE ARCITECT INOR TO CONET R RE CONETRUCTION I ETA LE E E E E HALLALEO H A111 TO GIMHAR CO—DRENE TOWNUIGOHRoUITEWIHECTLOECRATOEN THEI HRo I E CILCALLL.ENTIONEDIN THE DRAWINGE OR NOT I GET— A11ROVAL IRO. THE ARCHTECTIENGINEER 01 THE CUTTING AND IATCHING IROIOIAL IE=,UTT NGTEDDETE. ING ETRUCTURAL ELE.ENLE OlERATING ELE.ENTE OR RE, REIER TO INDIVIDUAL DRAWING EHEETE IOR ADDITIONAL NOTEE NO EURN NO 01 DEERIE ANDIOR WAETE ATENALE EHALL EE IER.HLTED ON THE _ECT E TE L Ina z vH e LLI o - LLmn - isEE°oa;iMM�N�Tra����Ns,s� S. w6tee o o � oe �T�oNANo i REMo�A�REo��REMEMs — — E��TR���oEMo�T�oNREo��REMENTs ....s oEMo�T�oN REo��REMENTs SEE°o3;�ESTSCD 9 u —w REMo�ETANKa����Ns�PP-LD�NssCD o� n EXISTING SITE PLAN / DEMOLITION w O �,J i°=ioo scasE 1N IHT w w 6 ®S: y ):: -a j\\ \ A ! � - n } . 5 • d` . f � -m! �REAL RE.ENLE E t \� y : , �,� , , ELECTRICAL � : _ mm SITE PLAN �ECALE IN Th(�� \ (D H oo LU < FFI FFF. �F FF, IF 11.111F 21,11,11, .17 FF, .1 M co, COMFORT STATION- � 0�9 511 COMFORT STATION- COMFORT STATION- I — - EXIST'INGI DEMOLITION WORK FLOOR PLAN EXISTING/ DEMOLITION WORK REF CEIL PLAN � m�8 5j' ( EX�II.STIING,/DEM`/­DEM0LlTl0OLIIT�IONVVORK ROOF PLAN 6 EX'S � 11 CALE (�) ECALE if " ECALE 1� FEET ECALE 1� FEET ECALFEET =] IFMILTIN.11K 71 15 COMFORT STATION �8 5il COMFORT STATION 18 5il COMFORT STATION 1 18 pa EXST"ING/ DEMO WORK NORTH EXT ELEV EXISTING/ DEMOVVORK EAST EXT ELEV (�,!E�XISTING �/DEMO WORK BUILDING SECTION CALE EXISTING/ ECALE—EET ECALE I-EET ECALE I-EET O o FT , T 15 T � .ils��vl Lv. O U - COMFORT STATION �8 5il COMFORT STATION 18 5il COMFORT STATION 1 18 EEcXL'TIN K SOUTH EXT ELEV EXISTING / DEMOVVORKVVEST EXT ELEV EXISTING/DEMO �/DEMO WORK BUILDING SECTION AE �/DEMOVVOR (�y �CALE ECALE—EET FCA—FEET FCA—FEET o6s -ji LL K�NQMSINIM ME I'll E.111, CRED OF E`.N EH FINN s RED NI A VN, "DDWEO .—F., T— T.- s— I N� ACC A FE O`HDW­ I 1111N. E'D N� ACC.lAFFAl. A C FEW E 'C'Co g: NO CIE A OF " L 0 A I C gN. FDDWE NIF ONPK ASOC HMDoWPES AN FPD NII AWAFEFEoCEHDWPO E 0 P P NaIPD OIL WATE R TANK 0 FEEOC HDWE I NII DOWNEPOIT ( �COMIORT STATION FLOOR PLAN I, AHOC HDWE NII ECINCIWA "D NII PRE F INMTL TI 11TTERIAHOC A TO ECALE N FEET HDWE N N�� WWDTAICA PTD RNEE OR RAFTERE IERIFI PTD SED NII Ll F ITIRE I AH'C MOINTINI HDWE IP IED N RE CNRRTRTTE 1E1 EFN 0 LFOCRFCAOAKE NIE CPTo E --- -— — — — —- NaTO LDERTIFEIE HOT Na' 11D�PTRER CEMENT E Sq 5 G�"I'. < I I IT C C 2E NNISF�TN' RAOR NCEDO NLT %`EVT`R`l`Co TRAL DRAWIN.E FOR FINAL 1101 we we(��',CLFECTEID CEILING P— ECALE N FEET — mi R001 1, (B T T ON 112 361 ma 1 2 1 � KNDTEVNEN NI 1111 EEEIIII ' NI EINNEE' Niz I—E N17 WD TERRU,88,ORI" ... T ER N21 IT I I EED I.NTI E'E L=N NO % 11 1 "DWE N22 R:ION TL 11EEIIN. "HOl DW N21 ITRITD IIDIOR I E ROUTE — 1—IROTEITION _,ORE EED — .1NII-L—L 06S (D oE" Ljo 2 MM2 vggi 1 2 "a 1 El— IN IEET -LLLLL Am 777 NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION ELEVATION �1,,STEXTERIORELEVA 1, w 0� (POUJT,H EXTERIOR ELEVATION (��VVEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION A B 06S w N LL KEYNOMVNEW A� a N, I'll FEW EllEl AEA AEA .-E. 1 0 N-E. I -Ts N�, I.-FALIT11 8 El N El TANK I A ,gN. FllE I NII IN'I'ALK,1,1" F F HEM -1 LEI "L BUILDING SECTION 1 NII IIN FL - 11TTE1111 NII _T FAITEFE -11 ITI HI NEI FEE IIN FINNN. 114 -1 1 61%IIJ ECALE INIEET 3 TI " 3. lEA" "T-111INI IECIIATIIE CINCIETEETICKE N41 lll� IIFEICE.ENT F, N41 1-1 FIEATIIN - - - - - - - 1 4 N41 E1- FTIIE woo LC "@ '47 0 C NEIT) IAFF NII .11Fl. El FEE FIN EI - - - - ECE, FACIIIINIA-FALL EF 1.0-EIEL 2 BUILDING SECTION 1 1 4 „a -1 1 AmIl ECALE IN FEET 4 T-FF C" 11 4 - TYPEA l< F- ­LL ��SACRIFICIAL WALL SECTION 112 -1 1 �� 2 4 BUILDING SECTION 1 114 -1 1 AmIl ECALE IN FEET ECALE IN FEET �� RIDGE FLASHING DETAIL al r,-TTYP. EAVE BLOCKING DETAIL ECALE IN INCIEE rei ITTEI DETAIL ECALE IN INCIEE o6s (D z H Z� A -'s o LL MOM KE NQTEVNEW Na Tll N, , E,11T Ell I—E NII 1tree IM'TI N�� IDTIII A ETD N "M"03 IAIT RE lElIll ETD "D NEI ME I N ETIINDIN. EEA. INTL 11111N. N11 APR EEIC I-E L—E NEI ALI 1-11 ECAL I INCIEE e— SELISETAIL A DETAIL AmIl . . . . . . . . PLAN 0— E_" E_, SECTION YP VTR DETAIL alN NII DECORATVE CINDRETE ITICKE ETD NII lll� IIEERCE.ENT ED ETD N�� EATIEREARNER N I—D 1"EATTINI ED as 1, — ELOCKIN. AE RE' 11—DIITE MD N CONT EEAINT �� N'END N ALI. IACED IIEI T 'E N11 CAOEI R E ETRII =TON N .LL 0 IEN "REEN A ENT' AT EVER, IT, ED EAl ONALLEIDEE E. EAC DIE NII III (TILK), I W) INTL ERACKET @ " 0 C A. ETD WE ICREEN " LT ED I OTLET LEADER N INTL LANL ' ED LET N;a IRE . RED VEN IIEI ITTRAVOLET REEIEINT ED. AAEEER ­L1. N11 A"LAD"EVE EEAINTEE-EEN I EE 00 ES ECR- EIACE AT I A AAOECTOR�OE�NDREII" N11 LIE INEEI M ECREEN I -A E.'ANDED INEIL 'ITTENED ON�N AREA IM E C 310—ELDEDT lRA.E@l OC I I-A—ANDED "HE A — 0 ANC OLEEA NAILER eL RANes `TDRVENTAAllLE TA L' ED "ANI RE' �L OCCIR TEREVENTE A �l O (�)SECTION E EE ECALE IN INCIEE area T T t 11 11 11 IN 11 11 11 11,111 11 &E.TERIOR In 11 111 1 111 1 111/1/1 1 1 11 SECTION ELEVATION CREEN �DETAIL al R EE E—E N NDLEE z v� - �o r,�s ; KEYNOTESINEW AS— 15 A „ORHFr SEA" "TLROOIINI NO EHEATHINE SED ENDU11,"K,.z.�, :D AEIRI aoo TRAPS U. CAI END 01 11TER 0 MAKE WATER E.IANEI ON UT z 9 wo3 t,... IBM L xc xea p w _ � XXX 0_ U a G �o ovENiNc PLAN s N s ovEwNc SECTION n VALLEY FLASHING DETAIL al DOWNSPOUT DETAIL al (z GUTTER EXPANSION DETAIL w m o = d o �% ECALININCH �% ECALE'O �% ECALE IN INCHESg Lu S , o LL KEYNOMVNEW 000a NIS�Il UNIS�Il NIS NISEXl JANITOR JANITOR JANITOR JANITOR *q0*� IIl­AT"1"1 N� SACCHCE�",*'0, H—E 0 IN D CC N� A TO LET 0 A ,gN. �,DDIE I SOP were N� A. A A Cl"H—A... E A.IC H—E 0 N�I 7ININKDA—C HDIE I I IINI IID CNC �A LKII NI RFrsco D L NI L—T II.TIIE 0 AMIC IINTIN. 11 HD *ADA,U,NISFXI *ADAUNISEXI DAUNISEI '0 '0 *A DAUN ISFX 2 -X2 �DAUNISE�X2 (4�ADAUNISF DDIE E CoRATVE c'NCRETEILICKI D N —1 N�e ACC=ER (CFCI) "EN To A ITOR N NII TO LET TIMIE HOLDER —RIFICIA—ALL ��K & PUMP �ROOM N& PUMP ROOM ��K & PUMP �ROOM ANK & PUMP ROOM T ,�,K, o OIEN To 7IT9 n -�D �D o- ROO. 05d IANITOR *4�NI'TOR (*IANITOR (��ITOR UNISEX 2 *UNIS,�12 (�C) �NISEX2 NIS '0 " , (6� �12 o6;w c� w SIGN SCHEDULE - BUILDING B zv _ oa boo Lu cxnsE ..: LL � LLQ � xx a aum folll > ao a o o a x-Exz x-Ex, © I o r _ f 0 �� COM FORT STATION - SIGNAGE PLAN "I �� TO-i o sCALE CFEET 5 sc EE )) wr�rrEeimo­ RE D olom c EA rsz sIDxTrxEA IsEDLTTExs ROOM 1 xEAUIlED sIDxTrxEx �aAE' oxxEx -----T CDmxLrw�TxA OAxASECT�Dx,ox - y LETTEwNs Co NTRAE ClAlAcT TYPEA TYPE SIGN LOCATION - ELEVATION SIGN TYPES a vz=i v s=i o J a w xEauxEo TACTILE i<� w n min i ll'TANRARD' 'OR cAAaaCTEa `..i"u=i (.a \\ SIGNE TO �caT� mP�v wi EEC /I SAM LE 1 x / \ L BSEAaW s / I lEX E m Dooe wALL T CExEauxEOFTACTLE aooa�P,� J e�sx \� e _ PEx� �,:��� -- co egg iwsx rTO oa TAWTELECIARACTER ¢ �o PLAN PLAN '"" ELEVATION ELEVATION LOCATION OF TACTILE SIGN AT DOOR LOCATION OF TACTILE HEIGHT OF TACTILE CHARACTORS ABOVE FINISH FLOOR HEIGHT OF TACTILE CHARACTORS ABOVE FINISH FLOOR OJ ACCESSIBLE SIGN DETAILS w O ye =i v 6 ®moo®� J w zv �qo wo - J wQ4 r,os ; wo 3 E;Wi DOOR SCHEDULE DOOR NO. D'looN DOOR DIATERIAL —TH THICKNESS TYPE T�­ HANESET DETAUENOJ c ...... ADA UNISEX 2 A METAL 3. 7 A ��4 F ­DED METAL FRAME A B F-1 aosA PaNEs aosA PaNEs 'L""'AM 'L""oa000s�E 000a E aioaEaamE DOOR TYPES DOOR FRAME TYPES KE NOTESINEW — � N. iia oaiP � 000a �� sTANOAaoss..T Naoa a w AIA 000a socu —NIA—soc lo aII nn REV Ea / comPsv y O m m EiNieA ELooa eeEcsosaa aoaz� = w JO O ¢" ELEVATION aoa TH AOAAs HITON ACCESSIBLE DOOR HARDWARE DETAIL TAaE DOOR DETAILS m d � N 6 vz=i v �Ja.-i o AirN_ Es C—D 5 C L C A C C -1 L COMl0RT STATION ACCESSIBILITY PLAN 0 PLAN SIDE ELEVATION ACCESSIBLE URINAL (D 00 Lu LL poo o5 , TO=i ECALE HIPET THO01 - ACCE PLE CIXE WITH DOI 1111 ADA ACCAEEIILE WATER ITAPPOIDE PECTIN Mla CLO SET To COMPLYWT IT DOI ", IADA ITAIROID, PECTIOM ACCELYWLEHAD"PITITIOADA DOI ECI EI TH ITAPPOIDE PECTIOM Ml� DA RE ACCEEEIILE — ITOE PECTIO I — 0 - 5 CLEA TAICE To COMPLY WT IT I OT " I I ADA ITT IT Tl'loAL.O 10 M W T' DO 0 JI DDE PECTIOM - ETAC I ACCEPEIPLE M11101TO TAPPOIDE PECTIOM 111P 0 COMPLY WITH DOI 1111 DA ITAPPOIDE PECTIOM MCAI I TOILETTIREIE I IPElIEl TO COMPLY WITH DOI ""ADA EAOU _ ED E� A� M fE---- 0 o0 on, EANITAlY HAPHIN I ALTO 'POP COMPLY W TH DOI IA. PLAN SIDE ELEVATION PLANDOIDE PECTION III PLAN To LETROOM DOORTO ACCESSIBLE LAV DETAIL/ KNEE & TOE COMPLY W TH DOI 1111 ADA CLEARANCE ETANDORDE PECTION - ACCEIIIILE GRAI PAR To CLEAR ITOOR OR GROIND COMPLY W TH 1 0 1 A. PEACE TO COMPLY W TH DOI eosADAPTANDARDE ITANDARDE PECTION EECTION- A CLR SIDE ELEVATION "- - W-, o 0 IT CLEAR FLOOR OR GROUND SPACE [fiq 305.31 ACCESSIBLE WHEELCHAIR ACCESSIBLE ACCESSIBLE CLEAR FLOOR OR GROUND TOILET COMPARTMENT DETAIL ACCESSIBLE GRAB BAR DETAIL SPACE pj DI -1 1 c,ear spare Ma) 1u„u m 1io aoor pva) m �2J IF Li aoorswing pyp) r W sTT,maaos sEcnoN aoa fiR�ONOTh 24PROACH( ull sidel FRONT APPROACH (push sdel HINGEAPP a„ar � ROACH (push side) ffia404241(c)l [fia 404241(Fll ACCESSIBLE MANEUVERING CLEARANCES ss,e,F AOA aNcaaoe cTlDN3oa MDP CIRCULAR SPACE SECTION 304.3.1 e -- s Ow,.ez]ev o T-SHAPED SPACE [fig. 304.3.2] ACCESSIBLE TURNING SPACE �J� (D _ q H oo LU o '� - NOM _ e aos sECT,oNsoe, sot sTANDAaossECnoN aoa2 ETocomPsv x x oOJHaANCHE ow oos 111 oA ETANDAaos ioNs ma soe a�) m9rsoaanm) ma soe z�) zooa soN�oa�T ACCESSIBLE REACH r„a M ffl% O s g s sTANDAaossECT,oNaos PLAN ACCESSIBLE ROUTE/ WIDTH & PASSING m,' s TCE IN aos Aaos DOJ A"AELLcAaPETOP,sE CHANGES IN LEVEL C�CARPET (fiq. 302.21 oN rz (ism m) sIF 'HALL FA FL LENGTHTINM ON THE ENTIIE OF THE E.POEED EDGE HAsso„Comp�,:�o�E: CHANGES IN LEVEL (fig. 303.3) 'ECTGEw,THaoALNEATEI omPLv ETTNDAoaossTo DONS Los o, CHANGES IN LEVEL(fim 303.2) ETANDAIDE EECTIONaoazs ACCESSIBLE ROUTE/CHANGES IN LEVEL DETAIL s TANDAaos sECT,oN aoa a TANDAaos sECT,oN aoi ELEVATION ACCESSIBLE PROTRUDING OBJECTS DETAIL —p6 w Qa` ¢ — s _ m O �a)row.aa m)aaaur, CLEAR FLOOR OR GROUND SPACE [fig. 305.31 @ ® O c C7 O a d ACC CLEAR FLOOR OR GROUN D SPACE IV —i o Nr1. — irz—i o TT �rti l � �y � ROTFMnvE"RFA �W.f,§;;fie= LTT- DI IT Fs SSF s RD END RED �F, I ERFIV.E I. IT N FILE "I OFFER FLE .. IS VOLUNTEERS TOCATEOFFNOV ITS C EL _ ,lam , rt — L�`"�.�`� TREATMENT I IILVIIE El IT NO IV RETOR ELL �]EMMOUTION-RE Y� � PAVILION- o� z-e° r-a'. PAVILION- PAVILION- _ �� EXISTING / DEMOLITION WORK FLOOR PLAN I �� EXISTING / DEMOLITION WORK REF CEIL PLAN ,I �� EXISTING / DEMOLITION WORK ROOF PLAN j j w O �J RCalf Rns � RCALEINFEET �J eRns=� SCALE �J RCau= SCALE NFEET m d w - (D W o - iM1l` LL Q� t POO. COMMUNITY PAVILION / COMMUNITY PAVILION / NORTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION j j EAST EXTERIOR ELEVATION I ecA�. iie=i AmIl MLA FEET ecA�. iie-i scALI 11 FEET oPe — — 11111�� �A _ tiff: ti1tit9 oNIN B' NIT COMMUNITY PAVILION / COMMUNITY PAVILION / 3 SOUTH EXTERIOR ELEVATION j j WEST EXTERIOR ELEVATION �i ecA�. iie=i ecA�wFEET �� ecAL. --N—TITRIIIco, COMMUNITY PAVILION / s 5 BUILDING SECTION ecA�. iie=i scA[. TMT a w �I—LITIN-RN 0 Y Q2 m m COMMUNITY PAVILION / COMMUNITY PAVILION / �� BUILDING SECTION I j �� BUILDING SECTION scAse. pie°=� scASEwrEET U scAu ve°=I sC—w I.T 0 S d z v� LU - o 2 3 4 "-0. 5 J LL Q„ _ a,�. Poa, ---------------------Po<,-- _____________ —__—O-------_ - --- --- - —__ - Poa==vP A — �w awTe� we6O 0 I 1 N=x x< ' 4 - - - - - I - - - 0 - - - - - - O n - I F- -@ c e IE _ OW =wixxanu=xewoascxo - ----- - -- 0 0 --- 0 � o 0 0 0 0 0 oti==nxxRxwLLo�wxx= PAVILION -FLOOR PLAN of = �g w OCOMMUNITY a io E IN FEET KEYNOTEVNEW KEYNOTEVNEW Y 0 _ _ ® vxi xx rwEe q�xi o-.Exiom N 000FClEI sso ¢� w m Ni AFENCwiroeaELE LINK — n = w Ni oorw �a�iox� EEirw eco, 0FIE 0 �¢W NE om N, PTo, 111 N eEE ww PEE. z v� ui �5o �� J 0 L Q „ p p p p q T 7 TT T 7 T TT 0 0 - - - - - - - Eo` - - - COMMUNITY PAVILION -REFLECTED CEILING PLAN 1I �2 p w �Jiia—io eC—iNFEET Qaw w >O KEVNOTESINEW ®,aa-xvrwewuezreviom N12 ®rvxvxv rwevwv Ev Ns IIE FIN.TL.IIEI N�, 11 CILIIN, PTo, KEYNOTESINEW Y —� = NII 21 CEUN. w w�= 0 o6;w (D 0 J o LL LQ„ — — — — — — — — — — — — — — J Is e .os of = PAVILION ROOF PLAN w (COMMUNITY o scaLE NFEET __� Q6w w KE NQMSINIM Ni a _ N1 AHIC uOQ m 5 — n = w ANCIIII HI O O j N11 IV IFFNILI IAHIC eEo rvaiavo�r, O d 5. 2 1. W' w- Z w" m oA W o �- LJL G „o — — — — — — — — FK oOPe nxCOMMUNIIGTYBIILDIN- XERIOR EL -(ION- (NORTH el A B �_� MEY IC 11 IEE NEWo Y TTJ 1 5 JAssoc aiEv, A. 'TD TOP OF CII�OF F NE NEi PaE�El ER55V NII PEAK MT-111 N. MNOR 'a e EATT'EE 00 7 a ECTI — PECTECTCN NE, ANCHOR 4 NEE cCNc EASE CA m �AE,E AE EEE �AE,E�CCA E COMMUNITY BUILDING EXTERIOR (ELEVATION /EAST COMMUNITY BUILDING -EXTERIOR ELEVATION /WEST eEE ww. ew co 2 OMM ei 3 OMM ei iTYPE PV PANE a. s VERrE p w Z Z CEMENT Qam NO ®eeeTee11111111 � w.FUEAE�EINKR _ Y a PED �aMN& a CJ -w �o E—�CCE cow e COMMUNITY BUILDING EXTERIOR ELEVATION/SOUTH 4vi:s� E CALEiNEEET1-19- o6s-. ------------- Lij LL u u u u POO... — - — - — - — - — - — - — - � �D IIIIT ILI II f--------- ------- COMMUNITYIIUILDING LONGITUDINAL SECTION i (Diia ,, I�I TMT B K�NI N�, Cl�IAL_ TIA HI N " NIIII IC NII IIIIIN.—IIII A IAITIII 1-11 I I NII I " ` N ITANI I T— —.�N N " ClC IAII 11 CIII j ITI IIo I s IAIT�IN NII _ I M NII I CI ILIN. BUILDING -CROSS SECTION A I I 1 606111 ICALI IN FEET g 3 tj- T— CILUMN, g (�)COIVIM,UNI- BUILDING CROSSSECTIONB T ICALI IN I.T AAz PAP R� PA�PE T � o z� �o w� — xxon� K�NQTVNEW llL_TIl HI III DINI—KIIELEE An ITI assss 1' xe m V� xxw� I xn mxxn I N � pp O\a " � � oE sE As INco cRa� DIN ac ixaa ° ° a cE.ENT N41 w a SHEATH Nc sso N a , a Iry _ __ ___ ! l__ ___ _ _____ _ a soculNc, As a cos wip. aM@?a NEaTF max IKETII F TTom ors@E e ED 0 0 —O s s @4Mo ecc III I �s Nc@41 RT,MAx�� _ - = o Eo` o` a OOTTOM NH .1 NEU To FEErIECIEo a w � � t Y U oz= - b � G gow� Q Ixi� W U =^ TYP WALL SECTION @ 2-HR FIREWALL � I /� TYP WALL SECTION ( n \ � �-HR FIRE WALL I scALE N FE � WALL SECTIOIN � WALLL SECTION � SCALE IN FEETg m SCALE N FE -� o SCALE N FEET 0 H Lu o ,�T LL -' .� .Poo . KEY1,01E3INEW xa - E'- Na 11NI L,TVP, ssD NII —11 xee xeeN17w D TRUSS x� �ASSD�HDwE FDSHIND AASSDl . .,.. . �a D CURS MD =Tl"CEDND HEH - e a P e -- --�-- S b o @ s $ �-�- -- - --i-- - RIDGE FLASHING DETAIL O[ 1-HR FIREWALL b' �. ^. O TYP. RIDGE FLASH. DETAIL b' ^" =� b e� aEaTMaxoc S IT °�11TS 0 R eonom - _ 5i ID, IFE FIN ED 51 ST@1 @a e o 0 lWDoDR0BOTTOM b] CLAED FLASH FAIR NM CLOSUR o moo` 2 0 W M SATT INSUTION SEEFINSCH - <= o Y o b I O �a< ow s r U � ¢ W m g U U a %�1-HOUR FIRE BARRIER `%1 _1 b 'i ��TYP WALL SECTION 'i JOT ��TYPICAL BLOCKING DETAIL ��TYP.GABLE END FLASHING °I w g O O a SI INFEST %� _� 0 FEET `%3_1 b SCAeE IN INCHES `%3_1 b SCALRw NCFFS 5 oI ( C3 e. .«' z _ oo W o �J ESINEW 41 NE' '" V O I'. R , ERa z aaa gbm �m J R Oee oIRE FIN ETANNN. FEA. FBI 0 .wFBI FIBER CEMENT BID wERERBARRBE sso ` 10 TYPICAL GUTTER DETAIL ° DETAIL 2-HR FIRE WALL ° DETAIL 1-HR FIRE WALL DETAIL ° ' ° @ ° 0 c. a ILATE 0 R B OFFLOM Nas P„a Nll I IFIM BID FEE FIN E, HER ' TF@@El10 BOTTOM wm _ 0 �� DETAIL @ 2-HR FIRE WALL al �� DETAIL @ 1-HR FIRE WALL al �� DETAIL al I" es sATTNFILAToN MA. CsR ' OCR @ N o� `� w Qam w �Ja.=,s NCREe �Jd-10 scAu=l7r Es „aa e N NecTs mT FN N°T co N°° "A e LLo > a ova > T q N.,a HAT CHANNEL------------- ------------ ¢" i o $ DETAIL$ DETAIL j�al _, ° 9 DETAIL (�2-HR TIRE WALL al _, ° 10 DETAIL�1-HRFIRE WALL ° DETAIL 11 �_, ° w�= EE -, Q J 5 z A W xn z - _ LL< -- KEYNOTEVNEW _ i IT, Aeeoc Do 2 DETAIL a „°, 5 TYPICAL CORNER a e, z. a. DETAIL � HD ' v E z eoo aeEoIIIIII PTo, eeo Nzz woaEAm,eeo a ao cE ZNo, site F eEa cEmENT — ATIa e Naz wEATHEAaaEa Naa eeowo eHEATH No, a - scan= N NCHEe scAu=iN NCHE Po � 5 N°� „°� e m �� DET. @ 1-HR FIRE BARRIER al "CALBASE DETAIL alDET. ea�iNiNCHEe%'o @ 1-HR FIRE BARRIER al ecAZEw wcHEev TYP WD WALL O CMU WALL DETAIL ILKI c 11 1 cNEaT) ^^" wo 000ezE TOP e PurE oa eoTTom s ��%z.-�_o. ecAZEw wcHEe A __ — _ �° 4 ITTT 7 IT „ A A s eEE o, FiN scHE IT Ee n Gae o o NIIIco G o, max c NEaT) w m 0 DET. @ 1-HR FIRE BARRIER al DET. @ 1-H R. FIRE WALL al DETAIL @: TO I-HR e, i„ a„ �� FIRE WALL INTERSECTION DETAIL @ 1-HR FIRE WALL o z a° ��TO EXT. WALL TRANSITION Nee IIATT N—TON Nea zwoE mTzeTI— CH Nefi NIIII co sE �m v w m 0 0 N. T CHANNEL y 3 � � � 5 wM„s ( � RNER DET. & TYP DS DET. I al m O Q Q Q 1J0 PAVILION �I �E ��PAVILION sva —1 1 scAu=iNEEET lb _� o II!�EET ��STORAGE sl ��STORAGE sl �J va—io I BEN FEET *1 _�o scALE'IFEET ��STORAGE sl ��STORAGE sl �J iTO ecAu=iNEEET %��a _�o e.LEiI FEET KEYNOTESINEW ENN PTD aEo Eo Nei IILL TP SEIV CEMIND %ELECTRICAL sl ��ELECTRICAL % ELECTRICAL sl % ELECTRICAL sl a C"NTEI, r......E va°=1 ( J iiLECT° IATED M11EAEN=sNI FINISH SCHEDULE FINISH TYPES: DESCRIPTION: zw ROOM NUMBER —C—ME CEILING NORTH E— S OEN� FLOOR � BASE C, � IFIS11EEECRI"c Cz ,rz THiCUPLvw°OO, PAi"TEO(SEESPECFiCITiO"E vA o00 J N Ca -x(FIRE ISFIRTAM, G FIRE ISALLAeBEmILL , PAi"TEE (FEE'PLA oR oN, EEE LL (Z LEP Loan SPECFi CATiO"E WALI_e PARrTo"e EO(SEE SPECFiCAFIIME, OVER I YXISIS OF SHe"THiCIF I c.PSUm SHEATHi"c, TIES IF(F HEsisTA"n, FiaE wAu_Aee EmsLv. wz III THC111111"Ne)EATHi"o, ttPExtFiRE REeieTA"r), F ISISALLASSE.—PAi"TEO (FEB F OFF FEC IS, IOG THiCCIE-1m EOARO,IPE x, TVPicALwALI_AeeEmeLv, IFULFO(SEESPECFiCanO"E wa CO"CRETE mASO"RV U"ILE PAi"TEO(FEE SPECFi Can O"E s IS PAiEOESEC FOGYPSUM FE sHEATHi"cTYPE IF REsisTA"nFIRE wALI_AssEmeLv IT(EEIS0M F I COC"RETE, ERUSH FIPIELL SEALEO(FEE SPECFiCATiO"E E, CO"CRETE CURE OR COLUm"Ea BE SEALEO(FEE SPECFi CATiO"E 5 SIGN SCHEDULE SCREwE Rr� � ERHNc :" A nowoE— 1. A R"�UL LETTERI"cTOEERBEHELY RAUsEELETTERE ROOM 1 SolLESScnPETOEE HPER11C4mEEUm n e ILUMIIUM BIG ROPER 1111 QEEEEOREER ° RA BED 1111 5 -----L R �RECTEEErOED BRA IT E c"EAERE°UREE BOTTOMOF E A LETTERi"o 10 comPLvwiTHAEA aAE EIIF To 4 y 0. TYPEA SIGNTYPESFOR —� AD ACCEZI IS `o o CE"ERLI"EOFTACTILE SIc"STOCOMPLrwHSECL,s-, - - __, _moo <_- w Y 2 - CHARACTER L / I\ TEXT EOOR IL 1 1 SA LE \ Eo` esN E CE"ERLNEOFTACT�LE = s' m -� _w -- LGISEETTACTILE �"IEHFLOOR CHARACTER o _ - - -� m PLAN ELEVATION ill LOCATION OF TACTILE SIGN AT DOOR HEIGHT OF TACTILE CHARACTORS ABOVE FINISH FLOOR COMMUNITY PAVILION-SIGNAGE PLAN ��ACCESSIBLE SIGN DETAILS �iJ ,Ha=,o (JEHe=,o m w p o6;w (7 J p= zv DOORSCHEDULE DOOR 1-1 �qo LL a tea: �� KEYNOTESNEW KEYNOTESNEW sEE FIN N wars TVP, ssD NsaSC E HE 0 N. wEN:° w,p03e A A B a, mETAL PAINTED mETAL PAINTED PAINTED DOOR TYPES el FRAME TYPES el lla =i o iia =i o lElTl E Naa eAEATAINo, Nei DDw mANF. N. o sT— III aEe. K. s ae 10 cIID lT Nas Ewo TaIm TVP ..t e L m FIN FL Is — AL —NI. Fl ERINIDNREMD1AeLE, sEE DETAILTaoaia EN ITEELIECIII eEEDETAILaAoaia — 'wwa FIN FL wo Txne U II18E.�14LQ xi II16E.�14LQ B DER WD NIE. DVAB LE) s EE OETAIL3a0a 1a EN sEE DETAIL aAOa 1 a el — in Txc wixnairx III amP�x"scv a i i! WINxOWP55ME4 tuAQ W G� (:,::)DOOR DETAIL nl ��DOOR DETAIL nl WINDOWTYPES INDOWDETAIL nl (JAMB asILLSIM) ��SECURITY SCREEN �J a � .ti w r ecA LF IN wcAEs �Ja=iw° scaLEwwcA iia°=i-o° scaLEIN FEE �Ja=i_°. scaLF IN wcAE T T T T -------------------------- -------------------------- -------------------------- -------------- ---------- ---------- J�l -------- - ---------- 77 -------- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -------------------------------- -------------------------------- ---- -------------- I I I I I I I I I I I I K-NOTE3N-' NI El— I. El — I NII I' LT 11 E-11E -- FEE -- HIE I,, - - - - - - - - IIIII.E. HINK — — — — -- OA CO�MMUNIITYPAV�IILIION-ACCESSIBILITY PLAN Sipt,=attp ova' El CIA—E 1� LEVELTI C1.11E A CC" CIAIAICII TI I T" I AAIIIA. 2TLlACZ7ET`lUT, -s T, HIT EECTI_ IA E—IIIIAI C' y zxnv�L ETA%lLAlZTUClTllI CAIET IHE �"T I"E .. IEEl EECTI-- I A CA111T IIALL El IA`l'- U ITI CHANGES IN LEVEL (fig. 303.3) ILIIITI.IIACEE — EHALL g-� HAVE I� THE —11E 0 LEWTH " IEILE 1. CAIIET El" T' I :1"11 11TH III HALE ECT— III � I—E ..a upruE CHA N I El NN LE�VHEAL, I EAT E I T , I CH EE I —El ANIEHAICI.11 I T H I I I A I I N I A I EECT_ THIEI HILII TI Cl"ILY 11TH FRONT (pull side) side) CHANGES IN LEVEL (fig. HIT III ETAN,_E ti Ffi 404.2.4.1 (b. 61 EECTIIN — 2 1 PLAN D2A-CCESSlllllLE MANEUVERING CLEARANCE -DOORS ACCESSIBLE ROUTE/ CHANGES IN LEVEL FE'SHILE ROUTE 1WDTH I PA-ING I (�DJ,2 I .11 air, alp GENERAL I. AL MADERWS AND Natt-U1 SHNL C.- TO THE MRANGS FOR L0AD5 BU TO CONSTRUCT. EOUIRMFNr, MN. AND 51410 I1fACINO. OBSENNAUUN NSBS HB ME SHE BY ME MCIHEflV SVU NOT INCWBE NSPFCDION OF ME ABAf IDEMS NOR FEUEVE ME CONTRACTOR OF HIS/HER WUGATWS, BUM AND RESPM98I00 ]. ME CONMN.TOR SHALL BE RES,ONSIEIE FOR AL EYCAWnOU PROCEWRES INOL.UHING DOING. SHORING AND PROIECDON BF 6. ME CONMN.TOR SHAL BE SOLELY RESPONSIBLE FOR COOflaMATINC ME - OF AL TRADES AND MAU- CHECK NL BUENSICNS. AU FFPAgES SH.WL BE rS„m TO THE ADTExOW OF ME EX.ME i AN BE RESOUWD BB'dE PROCEIDING NRH ME WORK. E. ME CONFORM AMES RESPONESAFETYR). FOR SCAR 1.1 SAFRCARES. BHAONG M. SHONE. BF EIEMENR UNOFAIm SREPNR Al REWIRED FOt SNUCTUMAL -1.1 SNL BE ME flE5P.S.I. BE ME CWTIWiOR. £ ME CONTRACTOR SHUL FPOTECr ENSTING SURFACES AN. DEMECTS TO RNNN FROM GNWE ANY REVS OANACEO WRING CONSTR ON BY ME CaxMACTORS Watt S-BE RFPNFED OR FFPUCW TOMESAnffACRBN BF ME CWHRY. J. 00 NOT OANAGE ME EMSTNG UWN MD OTHER UNSSC M Al "A""' GRA59xC mO UN -I. SHAL BE REPNRW IBY THE CBIMACTBR, rG TIE SATISFACRW OF AHO AT NO ABn- COS TO ME COUNTY. =..W ORAXNGS SHA- THE PRECEDENCE OAfA NBDET 9. ME CONTRACTOR SHAL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FIEND VBUfYINS Al 10. SHOP ORANNCs REQUIRED SWL BE SUBMTTEO TO THE ENGINEER FOR FflEN PROH TO FASR-04. II. DESIGN CRDFAN A COOES - R0IS MTENNANNAL BUEgHO CWE B. RISK GIEGORY= II C. WIHD = ION MPH (UUNME). EXPOSURE 0 0. S-C -ON CADEGOUY - . 12. SHOULD THERE BE CONFLICTS BERAEFSN ME RECAMEMEMS IN ME PIAME OR S,ECnCATIBNS. ME MORE SMNGENr OF ME TWO SHALL sNUCTURAL OLANNCS. xSPECIIOx O06 HOT RFLEVE ME GENIAL CONTRACTOR BF HIS RES,BNSIB.TIES TO CQUPL nE RRBmH IN A:C-cE NM TIE R AN. SPECIFICAnINs AND TO "W" SAFETY M ME JOB SITE. 1. TESTING OUNNG CONSIPoIC110NAOFFiHE FOLLONNG SI0.UCMA ANO N- SUB�MITREYIIRDD-PARTY RBR O�TOF'S CON. FIGPONS TO ME ENSMEMA CONCRETE - REWIRED B. RBHF D SAE. = REWIRE) C. U450NM - REWIRED (LLAfL B) 0. A- UMD TIES, stows ANo xalmANS - BEW1Rn E. ANCHOR BOLTS CAS N COUCREDE = REQUIRED F. -B. SKMNNJS - REWIRED G. -XIEO R.N-CED SIEII DOAS - REWIRED A. CWMACTCR SAL IXY IF INSPEcmR AH RE J DAYS N ADVARCE FOR NOtt TIAi REWIRES SPMIA INSPFLTW. 5. ALL -UAL INSECTON REPORTS SA1 BE SUBMITTED TO ENGINEER H. uDIX MAN E NWRHC OAK AFTER FACT SH DW. FOUNDATION I. THE FOUNIONTON DESIGN IS BASED BN SHN£9r0 ERNMEERNG, NC FEPBRr •SEOIECHN- INVES'TGAT.. PR ➢ IIPROVFMENDS .1-1 BEACH PNtt•, DATE. MAY I6, E019. ALCANLL DOTING PRESSURE (OL r LL) = S.- PSF COBEFKIENr OF MIC110N - 0.5 UIFPA PASSIVE FMM fMESSIFE = 3I0 PS, E. PRNECH SIDE SHOAL BE CIUIm OF ALL VECETATW, AEEUS, BRASH, F-. STUMPS. FUBBM, SOFT sal. DEBRUS ME OTHER OEIEIFAIBUS MATERW AND PROPE%Y 06PM W BFF-SDE. 3. ON ATE CIAYEY SILT SHAL NOT BE USED AS COMPACTED FlLL BFIAN FWTINGS OF AS BACMHLL BEANO flED M. WN FlLL AND BACNHLL MATEF- SHUL HAVE A UN1nW SaL-slnrAnW N EITHER OLA, Ol, GC,. SM, SP. OR .. FlLL AND BACNHLL MA1WA SHAH NOICAIE A NAXINIM PARM]E SIZE OF 3 ACHES. _CRY INDEX M PASSING ME FINE NR IDN AS DLIFRNNEO BY ME ASM N_-64 TEST SML NOT BE .READER MAR C. C PROF TO PVCIND RMFOIONG STEEL OF PWRINS CONCRETE, ME BOTTOM BE AL FOOTING LYCAWTWSBEEN SA1 BE CLEANED I IAOBE PROCESS.ARNNTH Y SOT OR COME SOL ENCOIENDOm Ar ME BOTTQU BY FOOONC EXCAVATION THAT CANNOT BE PRORRLY COLMPACEO 9EL_aA ME I= BE REARMED HOO FIRM F" OTEF� -CTO H MNU"' .-INCHES DEPRESSION SHALL BE -- NM PRBPER1 CWPACIED SDRUCTURA FILL, CONCRETE, COLRROLJ£D LW-SMENGDH MATERIAL (CISN) OR OTHER MPRDrFD GAC FUL MAIFPML 5. SDRUCNRL FlLL SHAL BE RAEE IN HORIZONTAL IFR NOT EXCEEDING 6' MMN S-O' OF KNISH GRADE M. I1' BELaA E'-0' FRW FINISH CWE B. U MESS OMEIMBE NOTED. FILL UNDER - ON (AIDE SML CONES OF 6-INCH NICK CUSHION IAYFN BF CFAN GRAVEL CUS11QU IAYFIN SHNL CONFORM TO AMCA NO. 67 GRAATIQU D SHA - BE CCNIF-EO TO A U- SURFACE USNG A MSHATCRY CWPACTCR. MY EXPANSIVE mIW SHNL BE aNR-EXGVAMD M A MINIMUM DEPDN W E'-0' BELOW BORON BF SLAB EIEVATW MD RERABED NM NON-EXP- GRAHUAR FILL J. CON - SDLL PRBWE FOR BE-NADWNG BF IXt.-S FPaI EITHER SURFACE AMEN. GROUND CODER OR SEEPACE. OESKN AND N 'M OF NL CREMNG, SIFANING AN. SHONE. NECESVRY TO SAFELY RETAIN EXGVAnONS AMH EARTH BARNS. 9 SCZCEaFLINCA TESOHC ES FOR SOIL CaMPACnWAMSTNG uSSRACE FOR ".-HE vaos BR -Es Mu 0. Nff5),IX11 ENNWUNIEAED, WUS OR _ ES SCOT BE OPENED, CI&NEO M BEERS AND MEN fl9p(FlUfD NM CWPACIED sMUCTURC FlLL OR UW CRETE (PA -I CON,000 PSI). PROADE PROBE HOLES AT 10-0' BN CENTER UNDER FOOTINGS MD WALL FOOnNOS. UHCESS OMEAAsE NOTED ON FLAN. CONCRETE I. CONCEE WORK SNAIL BE IN ACCOLUANCE NM AC 301, UNLESS OMERMSE NOTED. Z. AL CBNCAEDE SHOAL BE NtlbIIL VSECHT HARD ROCK TYPE ( I ONU. Fr.) CONCRETE u xi 6ESTHA t BE am"'.rBYY AAryWwClflm TESnNC UBORATORY ANO SALL BE SUBMITTED TO ME ENGIREEN FOR FEN.. 3. SCHEWIE BY STUCTURA CONCRETE ]e-DAY SMENCM AND DRES: MOTMOS, CAPBE BONS MD PENS - S.000 TEN 1. AUUH 0.40 NAX ENT RATIO SW ON CJWE - S.- PS MDN C.40 NAY WAIIXCBIMT PATIO 6. CIFM COVERAGE QU CONCRETE ONEA OUTER -FORCING fl�RS sHN1 BE AS FOU . UNUESS NNERNSE NOTED: A. cDAmr Wpm oBECRv - ]• CI&R r0 RENFOPLINC B. C -.r --K - G' U. STAB W CRAGE = I-I/P' CUMN AT TOP S ALL RE HFORCING BRAS AND OTHER CONCRETE INSERTS SHA L BE NBL BECW W IN POSNON PRIOR TO PROMO CONCRETE. 6. CONCRETE ADMIXTURES CMTAMING CNARIBE OR CHLBRBE SALTS SHAL NOT BE USED. 7. Au NBUGHENEO SURFACES 11 CONCRETE SHAD- BE MADE IN A MINIMUM ANPUTUOE OF I/6'. S. CONDRACHdi S'H.AL IRONOE ME ENGINEER NM 3-COED( SCHIN ES BF cmMUCTW. INCLUM. CONCRETE POURS. CONCRETE MASONRY (CMU) I. CONCRETE BACK SALL BE H- Lao-BFNING CONCRETE MASONRY UNIT CONFORMING TO ASM M. NORMAL wCIL Z. AL WALLS SCOUT BE CONSDNUCDED NM TYPE N NOLiHAR. A RAR SHA L ADHNN --S. SMENCDN OF I.800 PS AT . MAYS. 1 ORBIT SHAL FLDN INTO AL I.N. OT THE MASONRY NMOUH SEC DCATIQU. COMPE55NE s1RRAGiN Ai 00 DAYS - ],DDS PS. 6. RENFORCINC BARS - SEE NOTES UNDER RINFOHONG STE& FOR REWIROMENDS. S -E A MINIMUM BF 1/1' mBur BENEEM MAN RNFORaNG Ma SORRY UNTS. 6. BUM SGBG AL Ells IN CONCRETE E-KE. J. IF HACK IS IAYW TO A HEIGHT EXCEEUNG 5'-6' FOR EACH UR, PA DE -BUT AT fl44 FOR COL CINRNNING RMF A COL - BE N VERTCA AUGHME NT. OONLS IN FOOTING BE SET TO ALGA NM COIFS CWDNNING REINFORCING STEEL ID UNLESS BNFRNSE NODEZ. ALL W - BE CONSRUCIFD IN CONVENn- FuNNNG BOND REPER TO ARCHITECTURAL ➢-N. FOR SUFACE TEXTURE AND HEONT BE UNITS IARNC PATTERN ME 11. cm"" 'HAUL RROWBE BWIHK/910flNC OF CNU CONSTRUCT. UNTIL PONANENr STRUCTURAL FRAMING IS INSALES. 12 SEE ARCHIIECNPK DRAMNCS MD SPECIFICATIONS FOR PANTING REWIRMENIS. REINFORCING STEEL I. ROMMICNC GARS SHAL BE DIMMED STAINESS S MD CONPoRM TO UNS U23M. GRADE 60 REQUIREMENT£ TE MREs S- BE STANIESS - TYPE " .. 2 DBAELS AND ONOR EMBEDDED ITEMS ARE TO BE SECURELY Tm IN PULE BEFORE CONCRETE IS PQUREB. 1 AL REIHIMNK NO BAR BENDS SML BE MADE COLD. AL flENFORCIHC sm SHA L BE OETAIEO AMH RACED IN A CBNFOfl- MM ME WI DETAIMS -UAL - -e (SIP -BB) AS ..R BY ME RROIECr QUANNGS AND SPECIFMgnON£ S CONIHACTON SHML susur RBNFOENG SAR IAYWfi AND DEABs FOR EXCIREERS FEVtiN PROM TO FABRCATBN. FAEFKATE FROM REAAEAED NAMNGS ONLY. I. WEWIHp BY RENFORCING STEEL IS NOT PWMBnD. U) F Z =a W m Lu W STRUCTURAL LUMBER/PLYWOOD I. NL —1. WNB. I— BE WIIGIAS FlR GRMW N0. I OR eETMR. P. CW-UB C=NNS I BE OF/OF 24F-Y8 N MCWDMCE NM NTC II) MO PM31NATRf TREA1W. 3. SPECIES AND CHIDES NOTED IBME ME ME MINIMUM REWIRED; REFER M PRWECT SPEC—S FOR nNBERs IXPOBD M MEN, aDlENTS, ETC. NL —0 B BE OBMVS FlR C-E, EXIEAIW ONEE, V CWFWMNC m PflW11CT sm EME PS I-0). x-NO S1w CWRv mM rNHLE 13049.a E INC. NWW SHNL ff SMNIESS SIa1 CONNW MRE1 NNLs. POE -WILL H-I As REWIRED M PfEXRT S-14C. ON_TO ISM F593, TYPE 3185 NUR Nell BE STANIER MN -0- MO CWFBM TD ASM F59V, TYPE 316. USHERS IN- BE sTN—I SIFELL MD E— TO — AR18. ), ear HONES S— BE 1/16 NCH URGER gMEIER THANNWINA _ DF ear UBn. RW WTEN NE NUm IRIW TD WDBNG IN. 8. STNNIES9 SIFFL VMHFRs SHILL BE USED UNDER Bar HEADS AND NUm ACNMT 8X100. 00 NOT GORE ON NOTCH uOSM. Ret IERS, ON SE 6. EXCFPr MEM sHVM IN DE -I. WINN ENBNEFR'S MPRWA FW MY HCIEs W NOTCHES NOr DMIID. 10. MPNENEO ORWs ER—O W I.. B—I. s— BE sPAEO Ar 8'-0' W NAY MIEN NWBERS ME 10' W NWE IN DE- 1 ILL. L CWNECTW MF9iWTF.S, UNIER OMEIM E NOTW, ME MEN 1 'SNPSW Covm STRWG-nEu a.m U16r PMNnNC. m. D EWNs I— HNTE —1. 1Wo MSMNW. NE NEMW MACH REWIRES INCISING Of WNBER flaw PLwDW ONRmrcus: A THICKNESS PER PUN. PMa ' N. SH6 B. NL ROW Rn000 DVAIfl6GNs — BI L O6 — Ar 6' W CENTERS Ar NL PNEL EDGES. ii. O6 MIS Ar 12' W CENIEAS Ar ND .P—I. PLYN000 SHEMVNLs: A 51EAMINO EHNE BE C-C EXIEBOB fRMI Nfa — FEN SCHWUIE. SEE MCHIIECIUfl11 gUMNCS AND VEORM REWNENENm. PRE-ENGINEERED ROOF TRUSSES 1. muss DESMn Lam: fl00F R Lao (N. Di INCWgNC TRUE SF1F Lao) = 11 Pff CE]UNG DEM Ill+➢ - 4 PS R- qrE LaD - 16 PF (REEwq TEA IBC) 1, rv. ANO -RICI-E FORCES SHNL N50 BE F . �55Es 91prBE GO—MB WILOMB OWE. MMUFACTRRW N ICCWOMN MM ME REWIREN— OF ME IAEST mnm a Msm I'1URW,E —ON STAUMO FW META P— CWNEWEE VOW mUR CWSm11 m.' 3. NL ROOF N IBDROO -I- EKI ON AND.ur_F muss SHOP ORAM" I It BE _PEE AND 900 BY ME SME ENGINEER MIN r0 SUBNINA M ME ROP DIMING FW RENEV. TWRES SHNE BE FM— WEY TRW IENENRAMO. C TRUSS MaBEM SHILL BE OF GUOE NA I AND BE CONNECTED Ar , m WMM aom—LoiWnumvSFl 5iWTCHWDWaE wSIDE f emN�eRs. IVRCA ROOF l6UREs BINL BE A RiB P BE inm FW BNE ROW mu— NNE) aBED m WPPWr mm INIERSECnNG/Mumw — MD NM MECHMICA EWPMMT. muss NEB IENBAS IN- BE 2.4 (MINIMUM) NENBERS. MIS MENBERs MINDED IN BE EWA M W URGER MAN ME INS INDIahD W ME PUNS MO IN ME NO- 6. NAY UN DE-04 OF ME MISSES SHILL BE TER MAN ME (SPM LaWTH/9V0) UNDER ME CONEMED 0 ♦ uuE LAW. W1.ER SHNE BE M —ED IN ME TRUSSES EOUA i0 ME DENT —nN 7. ME CON —ON _ENENr a NL N 'I'— BRAgNG MD FUMING REWIRE] BV ME muss MMUFACTRRER PE-MTREWNUflfABT YEARS W -ERIBCE IA&SDDT wFWFlWfl , (V) IN HANNI. STRUCTURAL STAINLESS STEEL 1 SIFFL Fy = b IN51 NINNY NONOT gIDING SMNIESS SIFFL 11 155 ON KING TO Mm F593 AND sruNlfSS s1EII ANCHOR RCW —KING TO Mm AI93 W ISM ATLO. 1. NL MIDI 9HNE BE IN CON -NIT, I.STRU__ MIDING CWE MS DI.6. 3. NL -E Gel l BE PER—ED N M MMVDrFD FM TORS sHW. 4. SMNIESS SBFL ff PER—M U rvII➢FRS CENWEO m vEOm ABBREVIATIONS a .0 _> CW C— Nu 'ONCRNE NNSWRY UNIT CW C—N CWC CWCFEIE CWN CWNECTIW ON cmMu- Oa -BE OEO WGIE£ DET DE E Oq gMEIER OND qM0. 0 ONG(S) gUMNG(S) u uW EO EOUA - EW E tl UY FlN FlNIM FIR aoW RC 0— W RNIE BEW BR HEADER NOR HWNcnru xiT HDGHT WNGIT —INUIBNN. NECH NEWM_ M) „EN W ON CENTER OMG(5) OPENING(5) PL PU E RBTi TANFOMXNO R.D. RO, OPENING sWEO SCHWUIE SHr BEET IN. REAMING SIN 9MlM IL 4WE IN -W GRIM N ss srnlEss srta sM D sMAND T. TOP U TM ic MD0 OR CROOYE TOO TW DF EEROR E is TOP W FWBNG U. U-ss W NE55 DMEMRE NOTED YFIn NN xnry MENIqN fV, f5 M]NFdWNG fl41 BII ST-FS — IN llnw 1- o o O ] r �rao,>: SEE x• Ixx conc sa x/ (I) Yr .�'-o• uca xxcs ds Ar Ix• Ex, imi TOP, 1YP soli � _ i 1xclaNm soc, SEE BmG SECT Frc, im Ai NiWNV WNLs g' -p6^ aoaa�o R 3 SyB 'oN§mZ g 339Y a a :I a — L ex rl S01 g a `I `----- Yrl------� �l xu vZu mlc 0 S., mclm�m sVa a' mx 11 (4 - — -E ESE fi0. IYP Ai W Y fAWim�r SE£ Bm0 Smr fFNIxflFR nr IB JG (Fis x d+ AT U HORIZ, TAT 16- - PROWE HdE m MIN (1) FflOff B• mx CNu NHL [fmLY (E) ShMAI➢E CNNIrm) N/ P Ar W 4FHf W' iKK CONC sW U.r IB• U— iHe(. .6 SIORA^E HIO d0 Ai IB• HORIZ. IVP UON - FWfa m eLOxO qVO u�EYQi eNOQi _ F < NOTE 10 ON %T 500.1 w Z LU /,1 COMFORT STATION FOUNDATION AND FLOOR PLAN 3 I-o n LU o NOTES LEGEND c I HFFFR r0 SmUCNRN. GE1fAl1 NOTES ON SHFEfs 500.1 N10 5003 ' NFY �OS�tl1SFD �iE Ox 91N0 xHb(, � Q J p W RH cENENu xmLs eNo sxEErs sa11 mxu m>.s Fox irncil xmN1s. 2 flffFR r0 HCHREM- OR.IYHN05 F. OIYmSI0N5, SLOPES, cl xmorts caMmucnan oR CONmh JdNr, sFE OETNL p _ iLL p� min m � (n J W FIFNRCNS, mGRONS 0< OPPNPICS INO INFdflYARON NOi s— ON smucluRH xR�mrws. 3. R— r0 E"I-. E1 .— M. PWNNNG OMNNGS FOR 1OCANONS OF HL PIPES, CONWIrS, Egl—L M. � U � c€ � Q ^ £% GRAPHIC SCALE--' 0 6• I' 1' B' �, Q } 1- FRBl1pm MUSS .wcxox AP Ar � z EfARO rp ( OAr V' mBF11NMr,r, C lYP HGH fl00F 9p18 � rSNRO NHsr SAVP Rx FAffN (HOG), iW UM o---U.A F—� EE'T 5i � • I ��y_ ¢odd 3 ___ ___ _ _ _ _ ___ ___ ___ ___ _ _ ___ ___ __ m&"�a q//'MH I II I li__ -- II e II `o I I I I RAN I, I L_� I\ 1xB / Rd SL 4 501.1 (u HFN]ER BFNI — - e L) ossxm T41'eELw FGRI I I I II aRnx nor Sxoxn, - 0.S.B Sm NSEE N/OI3E\)V, iW � _ G A G A Z _ ° s - Rx FISH y y Rx� N 1LNfR ROOF NIO J Rx0 Po E Nuc4 I F ING 0.1SHm BFIAN u) R F v Z - LL COMFORT STATION ROOF FRAMING PLAN n a p Q Lu � o Z NOTES �wc Uzi c O I. flFFFR r0 SAVIGNRK GE1�Al1 NM M SHPErS 5 1 MD 5 2 FOR Q J � a 51RUCNflu C FRu xoRS MO SHFEfS 5 1 NRu S339 Fox rvPlfu = Lul m r! jm OErN1s m N V 2 flffFR ro NCHR Mlft Ofl.RNNGS FM OIYM9M$, SLOPES, J u) ds PREWOMS, mp I 0 MMNGS NIO INFMWOM NOi 9H— M s11NCNfl11 pUN1NCs. U o -€ RE m NEMNII[K, EIFLMGK NIO PWN9NG OMNN45 _ 1dUPMS OF NL PIPES, CMWIrS, EWP L M. V. FM NM-MU55 F EO IAVS VIM EWE mONGS PEA NCHIIECNflfL Oflnxncs. manoE muNc aasrs (NNINUN RxV sr 1s0. GRAPHIC SCALE N O 6'I R B a Q RBI li d li I � H� rl7i I sL Rr ' ' T R'm l rJ dl L III Rx PER PVN J \�L/ rl CNN HW BN /I PEA PVR �FlflCEA iRUSa Grl PRE-ENf R-1 AAVW IRU556� .VSN IRNSa Pm P J/ Ni / Rx RaIERa z PEfl PLw X-pi Flx CflWE CpxC SCp P"' Pm PVR Pm CM PER CNU Nui � PIAR, aW PFR — - d R Ga PEA PVN COMFORT STATION SECTION SCNE: ]/a = I -0 „UNA A96), rEE FWNaAAW p1Ea W 91ELT Wp.l (d I PER PVN s y 0 6 Mi fRRG IRUaa M �/ RWCH pPNG CISHEO fiYWO pflpEA 11N55 Gil PEA PM - Z 2 O W to Pm PVR ] COMFORTI-0 STATION SECTION 4 W � W _ - Z _ _ w o CNu �u „m PER P X m CW WIL i PER PUN, o'er" Q J CO N J N Q m kz aW PER PVA PER R�I➢LE aW PER PVA PER .—L () Lu §% M - GRAPHIC SCALE MCRM 9IB iHICHmm - EWE FIC. IVP COMFORT STATION SECTION a. 2 u•, �.. ]/a = l -0 SVa mpE COMFORT STATION SECTION Prp. 3 = l'-0 p 6' I' R' vB' ]/e•=l'-0• x i 1- I i � � SNxs AT Is" solo xu2 i arc mo unEsQNaO 5; =o ao£b�o e p 5021 � 25 NIN! fl.0. ABarE H O� SVH EDGE V+N (' 1505R.5NQAi�e ---1 r—�—1 r—t—1 � SVB EDGE jjj _ _ r----ceR---7 ________________ _ _ _ _ _ ____________ _ r--—ca---7----ca—�/b _ — — 9b L J FI ` J FI ` r— T r wkg IP., FR aSLPm r -T r 5' Mx CONC sac N/ 1, Ar r 6x6 V00a xOV r 9NIAPm (ruLL_ .we> s¢ CML ONGs a cone wuxwr N s¢ anloi oix r L a a r 1 L a PER avt Nvcs a SEE • VOOo r 1 L a �•4tx e�' e saG ei :.E e.Llfir° EN#'�y® - e a y9' Ar Iz• rlr a J r rI L r r'CaNa PmLsrAL, `-T r sFs '� IrR 4 vNr- r sox.T � _ it R.a a ml al `I a sozaI N'`�`� sov xnmxn x I" I I Ix-I/vxlx• I I I I 10011-SaSR.5 QUVN Cp � L---- 1 cex--- sEE I M r � 1 L---- sn. P 0+O cex--- n auFl L PNFL J g Z _—cex--- � — — _ _-___--- --- _+_________ }� rI L J rI I s� J s" nlx cone srsN xui - O NflNFO-OOVN SVB EaGE BN — � — `\ `<ONC' AWE FI, SVB EDGE VW R.O. M101£ BNAN B' TN. CNJ \ (NLLY GRWTEO) CaxC Ffa TYPE � EXIWafl BVW \ / H Ai IB' 4flR N10 R4" _ N F CIXIC NNIMAY SVB NOi sHPM. O.Owes ttP, iaF EL - 8.5' IVP, iaF EL - 8.5' sTLO VNL INIYP \\\�I�I d4 Ai HOflIZ cane cum, SF£ M1P VNL fiG, ttP. TOF EL = 6.5' &COMMUNITY PAVILION FOUNDATION PLAN FOUNDATION PLAN a _ s ¢ m - = Y W +� W �. 2 > o 0 o NOTES LEGEND K a t IL a f I. RE-r0 SIBUCNRAL GPfA11 NOIES ON SHEER FOR STPoI[NRIL GENWL NOTES ANO SHEER-.1 ma.l N1a Saa.R ^ aEN025 PLYM]00 IN— NIAx, IHRU wig P z Fdi MiCN. aETNLS. PNTA. CBS OENOTEs WNL rDODNC OR CHIDE EEFR rD NMNTECNPK Nu oflANlncs raft wslarrs. saPEs, wsc, sEE samuLLs an sxT so.SJ. x. fl1. EIEWDONS, IllCADONS aF OPENNGS NIO IN—. NOT SH— CI aPNm CONSrRUCDON OR CONMOL 1. ' - - J m N m N on snmcrwL oRAxnGs. In crncla:TE sum an GRADE, sEE oErNL�x 1. flEEFR 1`0 NECHNB, ,crN. . m "WENT,G OMNN45 tali IMADONS OF A11 PIPES, CONWIR, EOUPNENi, EfC 4. RE- ra Nd:HTECNPK NUNINGS FdR PNNTNG/<OADNG OF O LU LU c c€ ¢ n a �--' N srunLLss srFFl GRAPHIC SCALE R'Fii O 1- sma mu o _ a� =o m&" d ff 5021 � J Z 6 s BFLON Bx 4 F ILL 1 BGN j Ix FNipN M J —imp LU EIMEq� rNc oFcanc, M } LU s a so COMMUNITI-Y PAVILION ROOF FRAMING PLAN — > o slI9 o O NOTES I. REfFR ro slWcnlRx cRenPL nrnEs W sl¢rs mo.l mo 500.9 z _ FOR SIPoI[Nfl11 OENWL NOTES NIO SHEEfS 503.1 RIflO ­9 ¢ J Fdi MiCN. OETNLS. u o = a W 0] m 1. flEFER r0 NKHIECNPII pUN1NG9 FqV ONR1910N9. 40PE9, m U) m EIEWOWS, IllfANWS OF OPENNGS NIO INFdNANW NOi SHORN — U) lm ON 5981[MIL.—W. J LU }. REFER rO NEOHNBM Fl crmN'l1 MD R NG OMNNGB FOIV O U o �€ IM RONS OF NL PIPES, CONWIR, EWPNEN" EFC ¢ n ' 4. flEFER r0 NCHIEONPK NUNINOS Fdfl PNNRIG/<OARNG OF srunlcn sNr•2 - _ GRAPHIC SCALE � N c N CCNr Bx18 9N BFLON 8x16 W 6ELON Bx18 BN @LOW CN1f Bx16 W @LW Z _ _ _ ,_ y _ I y SIN !! y III III S S 8 S 8 S S S 8 S 8 S S S 8 'g5 S 8 S S CWr BxIB RIOOE 9x 503.9 M a IB RIX£ BI 50}.9 M B RIDGE BI III COM B.IB 01.8 RODE BI III III �i 9N 1 ilk SOlB i -- M J M SOl.9 J - 5019 1— �i IEf/L flaaFlNG, SEE IACH 0.MS 1 2 3 4 �RYNO SHFAnING 5 o _ S ���'��� e ��„` p ;o�G-'" d �rS. ao �� MRA ihG aEIXINC 171 m&"fig �ao¢ rvus Pm PM wrims PEA n�N, rva voaY sruo Pumnan vNL v sruo - e a SUB, SE£ CML rro a (E) RCCH E>Ev WAES, FlE1D WiPY n assE R, rw n aa, rre CCNC PIFR, lYP PEA PM �Esru, rn i � cant sot ! �V000 srta col SIEY vui ain Pi w �MV00 cant vnxxnv SUB, SE£ CML � g _ - (E) Yasur RCCH, GNBE fEMI FfG PFA wou FfG you Fro J q65 OROR fAN 6B WW PEA PVN. iW PUB, IVP PFR RIN PFA PVN RES), EEE FgNY.1naN� - U r W W „ - ons rn siEEr sao.i COMMUNITY PAVILION BUILDING SECTION j swc i/4'—'-0 z L ` m L LU o Q J LL 0] U) as W - _ GRAPHIC SCALE M �s � � 1- FfNRG1ED 4 �� i U-fNCNEf N/ 55 MflU-NOLiS, ttP i z i 0.Y'A SHFAMNG MEA ihC OECNINC NEfK fldA1NG, 4E IHCII VnCS P•� i 5; =o ��4,, ao§x'� _ 3 66y �odmd i�9 � PRY' PFR PLW i � ; ¢co "W U-fNMNEf N/ 55 MflU-N0.i5, ttP r,R100 BY PEA RIN. IlP e � — P4 CONC NNRIUY ES IHs GWNI COL PEA PVN, ttP P P NtlW COL � RlN CCNC PF➢ESNy rvP [ON[ CMC SOL ee g v y_ g 2 SUN, EEE CML VM16. FlD➢fl YWI PIER, ttP SVB EOCE fN. IYP - V r y� F Z W _ + mm `fiG `CAI➢E Lu W a(E) fKLLi ROCK, P-E fUR POS4NIE PER BI PER PUN, lYP PM. m _ o 0 SEE F0.1NG110N� - ? t - MES ON SHEEP 500.1 _ ¢ � a COMMUNITY PAVILION jO n= -Y BUILDING SECTION Q Wm m N - u) m V $ as W � q d Q - _ GRAPHIC SCALE d CL -M, 99N X u--c- lxN c— pl�E BAN UM ____________ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - c. JHII P., P. pm 6 BEYCx D II II I II I II - PIER II CR - P- X F c, ---------- - - - - - ------------- ---- s- Jq Nui NAu �(Q) ROCK.IER VOIOBE ORSPR s — E mNmm MM Nm ON SHEEP 500.1 COM MUNITY PAVILION BUILDING SECTION ALONG GRIDLINE 4 GRAPHIC SCALE 1- � NEfK flOf£1NG, 0.YN0 SHGMN� VNrS 5; �o i MRR ikC OEA(ING a U-tlU.CIRT N/ SS N MflU-RUUS, ttP N000 ENO iUP aP au i - xaL rerano x000 eN PER PUN � � PVN 4 PER � M SEE CM COnt 51FM SUB, E£ L g Z A 2 _ r F Q J �CC SIEM — - PEA Ufa PUN. P 2w s E m W 2 Lu J � m _ 1E) BKYi flOtl(. WNL vao�s oPR�cm�nEs�NB mono ¢ — CC a 5 t „ as), sz Panwnon� oiEs an MEET mo.i fr [L a - COMMUNITY PAVILION BUILDING SECTION � srNB: �n = _ ¢ _. a Lu m m u) - u) m V $ as Lu �O - _ GRAPHIC SCALE PP SP H T F d SAID WNL VOW Pwr e RA D rvNi it can PEA P- it f: - - - - 0 conc -cmYL co m u) z L2L, P-E P- Lu z [L COMMUNITY PAVILION BUILDING ELEVATION ALONG GRIDLINE 5 x > Lu ) u u) 7i m 02 as Lu GRAPHIC SCALE BEND UP DOkN, 1YP FOOTxO LM1tli fs]NF �. G G BEND UP CR 006N. 1YP Laonnc •. , •. ausr flENF LCxCR°IE1 F x DM PLAN AT CORNER PLAN AT INTERSECTION D1TYPICAL WALL FTG IWF# DETAILS) nor ro _ RENFx N tlU➢Eim SZE N NUMBER 10'-O' NN CR— J.E RE111 R11111-0°U flKNFlLL IIkNLH LJ FOOTNG —SIZEHORD Gp m PFR SPECS IXGWnrn s—E. rs. 1 El� 3' MIN BNIFoornt I'�• I CO.fA, MEBORON OF M CHxO GVPTOx S 13 MN EXIENO — MS UNEf ,1 SLOPE [bIPN:AII FlLL 0 1 ROP1 m� Pm F RDff: FOOTNG STEPS ME CrnIPoCiOR — PRO.IOE SIIININO, S-1—I. OR HgVIZ VP p_o� ••• 3'-0' NIN Sill"OlslE➢ O� BE MNrNNNGME SIZE � MME1IXG�n� fRON 58 �o� SPLICE, rkB SEE PUNS ON - ux NL u ESEpFlGTIXS. gy 4 a £bey 3 �5�8 n�odLd 2 STEPPED FOOTING I GB 3 EXCAVATIONS PARALLEL TO HIS nor iO _ nor i0 v,F wE�op e HOOK LENGTHS (H)rn(n InaEs) I N.A eonis ° iE 1�iooN SIZE 9a lea Ba 115' D1 DI JH—' x60R "DDR °°" "°°" -I R 1-I a PRINCIPAL REINFORCING I 8 3-I a -In a -In 1 �5 BO 5 5-In 5-In 1-1/1 3-3/4 9 - 5-I Fnf IXH- A "s RD¢ PE OR SPRRUP N1 BFI•]S E1WL ff YIllE CN➢. 7 I o OFFSET BEN (BARBENDS AND HOOKS AND HOOKS nor rD _ m®�®0�®0 ■f!•©leago tJ�®®0�00 ■'7�®® rti®000©00 rl7®��� ROBS 1. i0P BIAS ME HONIZONfN RENT—ENENr SD —ED M6r NONE MAN IV ff fRESH C— is wr 81— ME SPACE. SNICES BASSD 11/0 NI" CN6R. 3. CENIEA M CENIEA BNI SP 1. s— BE 2 ash. a. F YEADtl1 AN ll—rN 19Nf°flCE11ENi N CNU —S. USE — IFNSM WIVES Us- F ra 3.M PSI AND 'OMER B '. Urn. TYPICAL TENSION SPLICE TABLE nor To _ N1. S SEE FPDXY NelEPoll NOTES DN SHEET S-0o1 FOfl KCEPFNIIE EPDXY A ESYE PRODUCTS. 1. fUR /3, It k AEMS SPN:EQ 6- CC DR NOEP, I E OEPM N6Y BE REE— RCIS. 3. ME D�ETNL St- BE USED UNLY NHERE SPEC 1— SHWN M x.S. a. PAN COxPFESSEa NR MM.vnFE 80.1141 FRI. TO fA01111NC. 5. NL DOYEI.s SHNL HME — INWECMN. DRILL AND GROUT DOWEL SCHEDULE nor To _ 1- EO 4FHf OONELS, AP wrr flENF Ir 011ZE P. YFItt IR]NF YArCH 9ZE N10 PEA PVN w,ra SIZE N10 PER PVN� WALL FOOTING SCHEDULE"cnc�nr aunt xlom conr eor au vNL cw vNL flawlEA NFl T-0- (V) �5 1'-0' VP SR10E CIEW, flIXICHEN SIIfS E SUflFKE 3 ]'-o' V8 SPACE 3 3 nf1 Y-0' (3) /5 AN GRI➢E OR .'r ^VLf « z y %4 V N rn —E �tlYl G /V SAPoVLPS N s -C.SEE CML i IR' 'd Ai IR' 'd ONC, SFE 4y6y_ p �odmd f �� CIXR fAr flEIK, �� CIXR Boi flONF, (V) 07 CONE rkB lo' fiNo, AP 3E SCHEo \ SEE SCHEO I➢0 (I) �V CONr 90 OEO SN Hod( R,-0. � 90 OEG SIO Hod( NNm, SEE SCHEO N[Im. SEE SC EO - WFI OR WF2 WF3 & COMFORT STATION - FOOTING SCHEDULE AND DETAIL (DOD FORT STATION -GRADE BEAM DETAIL a A 'w !n - H W C N Z U d W Lu 7(L ¢m Lu O �O fr 5 H ILF LL r, d h Lu ILL Q� O jm Lu m = u) U ds Lu OJ U Q ^d - _ GRAPHIC SCALE N � c M FOOTING AND WALL FOOTING SCHEDULE gNFA510N BOlrbl fANFgiCINC o sxoflrwr EancruvN Fi e'er• a'Lo• x'-0 Oc) Ya Da) is Fx �'-o• �'-o• —P - Ae (e) ie Pass x'-a' canr f-0• is Ar a' (3) is canr IcaxcmY ""F Cmc PEUEaTA C- STm Ofl CUIa3 _ (MSHm) ISE£ FMTHadM NOBS a&6ECWHs SueaRKE KIa FlLL REa111RFNEMS. 1• � `sHOHrNAY Doi flgxF PAVILION - FOOTING SCHEDULE AND DETAIL nor ro _ rr a .wcxafl ears, 1 E. av�oEar� P a z 3 Sall x• � rn A4 ttasm nm pia YEM Dams T e�, m uan (a Tarr) DETAIL I PLAN nor ro scut n5Yg1 ca wY (3) aEosm nEs AT r Iac PER sac �I PER PVN � 111 GRADE BEAM SCHEDULE gNENSIM r61NmM5NC — rnaEurs o - aw Nor aw cei zVa• z-V (4) YT (4) Ar H Ar a• ❑ cax x'-r I - (3) YT (3) dr i4 Ar a• ❑ 777,17 3• oV� o _� mBP31 INN RC m. SIffYE MflU ®. a. pQrypLfY[ /NY flgK (PAVILION - GRADE BEAM SCHEDULE AND DETAIL nor ro o-" F 0)i4 Y4 AT it CgiH— onc aUKME CUCAFN SIEY VNL CIFKI. RWGIEA SIIKKE _ aF rrc I Nf PEA PVN wa srK�aLL war Dams, sm nAA em aF c � � 8• aEfa iyp -- ' I n SECTION n SECTION nor To srac^-o =H= PER P— SHTG V8 Pq i awS ~.way wcs Pw NHL SNO PER PVN CONC CURB 5• flgK ilxx'-8• EPDXIm cant S1EM YaaL oows AT ix• CgIC YUIl FfG IR]nF PmeslN 03.3 n SECTION N sac,,'—'-0 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 3• e• r 3 I =ice L�1 U)LLI f Z _ im W LU - J LU aO fr o f Q J LU a m N m J LU Tik. �`� �a PROPERLY CaIPI[1E0 ti41FPUl OR UCLSx 1�1 CONC —K MNF PER PVN Na BJRNE '1QY Kaa' M 1"1� cxuNs EgY1 axmMucnon Janr i l _ tax slle I-I/s' (I) dV oR iansimlcnanxaan� is uL aam EN is a erR FPoxDE Nr, eARs cIR IYP rse cone MPoI Janr, F Y S -11ION MI] RR FWronnon°Fx0�" B ' CONTROL JOINT CONSTRUCTION JOINT NDIES ON SIT s-WI AT EXTERIOR N LA SB ON GRADE TYPICAL SLAB ON GRADE JOINTS�� 9 oas�o r m sr,,,: 2 x rD µ conr xaaz B�Rs AT e• mM calm I AS PIPE THft11 I'-8M cm110I'-Ar 5'xl-0' IOW 5' NIN, T!7 FON PIPES N RWGHM SUFJ".1tE i1P 9 Nsx Tt M5 NSA BO1Ta1 OF OAFA FFG So O _ F ,e r TOP OF 9IB - FOORNC� MPoIP-s PYu iR� I U.- - LLL \/ no R x POR CW H f f4 AT 1V'P A PVN de oV D W dF PIPES 19II NID LOGRM Doxsls A. INS o• (xodV conr Arm --r it O u AS ffANDM BY ^� (s) fV CWT „ b O NVa1 AND NECH F n s H/D IF H IB• DNcs. �FMERcm a slurs }. SEE CURB DETNL cwc suB - Fan f — M ImnF PER PVN 'D'.I'-B' IENUImJ Ss ARCH outs SEE EWIPN 8 BOLT aA OR 3' NIN V MCH F . ' C. I' DEC HOKK E. TENT COxmAcrtN ronW Frw mws max FOOnru: MCHaVIGE I rs00 '-O' O I. PROxDE I&N CONaiEIE BELW FOOnNC (R / Nor POSSIBLE, PERe A f. FWRNo ERNE BE STEPPED PFA Z �M�cmI- mtl 503.1 11' ISLAM fl AT IB' Ex - 3 PIPE PERPENDICULAR TO FOOTING 4 CONCRETE CURBS AND PADS S CORNER REINFORCEMENT = r ro srsJs r rD srsJE r rD srsJE To 40 ' ~ J w Z =t a x41m Ox�eIAKKH Y`ECx� PIPE r qryLLI ' f- NFL OR RLIB OYES ROORS, ' ' ¢' LL c- 0 RB91 Ai NN1H � O �J PIPE SIEEVES TO BE HEIR I' CIA }D OR V NIX = Y 0' � V EMIEND W NxROLY n RATE N PIPING THRU SLAB q2 WP11 � 0_ d Em No BOY is.. PMER JdM OCCURS 1YP IRINF CL SUB YAM D-i/} OR R• CWC CauJH PIASIIC OR SCHED VO Ofl YYi NICIE>,mV IS SYNIER = �wE N.E aAEN� _ _ _ Q J ON W.H. E- OR W a] 0 Y3 fVx1'-0' DNOaU1 0 .fl OR V' N CO N CONS. jj DR a �BE Ar . CORNER E. REINF flW5 PIE SEE TECH, WXN. N oEN. �W M SUB Ofl R4L - u) C11NiR0. JONi BE r0 Ma0 TO — s— BEo. PILJBNG vx YNL I - IX CaIRA 14G1E J UJ a-L TYP KK (4) AS DIIECNn aY45 WXWB N SNIE UASR Z NNL TORT KNF O U c -� a• x cmouir �_ U w� ' CONDUIT IN SLAB OR oTH.NL DETNL NPUES id INDMpV1 Plff SIEF£ LOCAnam ONLY. MIEN SUFES MVE IE55 R4W l SUFES �R DWIEIERS MNtT Nm/OR 1 OR YtINE 9f£85 IRE N. INP059a£ OBE D m gCEmm.Ms NIFA IS P, SffCP1 IRINFO ME WY ff NEmED. SEE -ER pwW 1. rypkpy DEfNS KK CONSULT ME CKKRNCRNC OFFICER. DEiNL F. OPMNGS IX SUB KK N4L 7ii MSLAB ON GRADE AT PEDESTAL TYP REINF AT WALL AND SLAB PIPE SLEEVES TYP PIPING AND CONDUIT IN OR THRU SLABIWALL onoT To swENOTro scuE nor ro scuE . 3 ) 1/x' inrtu�ars �� tt cOL xK ss X BAff R ' x000 ca ^ E0 B�CONN 0. M1GCO CM u sloE • p ss ix"u-aoLn '" 1 /e' ixK ss 'I CONN PL U X SIOE L A G 90E I 5•ri A�)8/CC, iWON 15'xl,V• s8 0 � �� 980CR CHLR &ff 0. TOP M <O"C 3/V•OJf ON-91flIN( CA1 PEa6rK �E£ prize a �� PLAN -COLUMN BASE Oe PLATE DETAIL SECTION "X-X" CONCRETEOO 1 a8x8WDTO fl4�ff PIAIE SHNL ff OHIfNlEO NMIN PVNE OF PMRNON WNL H88 NBE COL (SS) 5/B' PL ON I-I/2• NON-SH18NK H. COL CRWi N/ (V) 3/V• /x P. PVN M SS IB � TOP OF SOG OR 1 1/2' �N COLUMN BASE PLATE SECTION DETAIL HSS TUBE TO CONCRETE not io s_E M U�Ors� aawr cwws acaL 31/x• Cw VNI"xNONB PL s= PN u ro Y fl�5E PL iHflU-BOLTS GwVL COL 88 CONN , EA q q 5" ]'/T QW1l C0. - ]/E' MK (]) I. Ou 85 �Na a CON" R ' 40E 8• aC, IVP G sIOE I I g �Y" 19'xl9'ri/V• M s5 F—F x NON-91flIN( CAWf pmESr& BO)LiS WOO ffE OEfdLB u HEX"Unn ma 4 2. 5; e0�&�ooK PLAN - COLUMN BASE PLATE DETAIL SECTION Y-Y" DETAIL A nrs 12x12 GLULAM COL TO CONCRETE - F Z J LU OU J_ Q GRAPHIC SCALE �n o ]• e• r �a O (R> i5 fORrM S IE55 -N 5'-0• (R) /8 FOR OPNGS 5'-I• i0 )'-0•x; (R) 17 FOR OfxGS 7'-1" i0 10'-0'1 SEE�PINI FOfl flEIK ��ry 9P HOq( 1 nnofl unE sncic w,r `SiN10410 Had( YHFAE NN ENBEIMIEM Di POSSNIE ryp�; EXIENO .VJB fly% FlA i0 frA 0R ro �5 a on w z-0• IN I .. �� OPENING E.. V'-0• In Nn1 o1HENNlMI E— a ePa oN N EMENo z-0• Nln RI6T rA¢ ar oREnnc. SINnE Nnr PLAN - JAMB OR ELEVATION END OF WALL MIN REINFORCING AT MASONRY WALL OPENINGS JON is _ HWZ LW HOHIZ VP SPNCE Ar (�� fV[E EFNM Nn.rnH i 1HCE'nLLou�oH Liar un OPW-ENO afoot INTERSECTION CORNER 2 CONC MASONRY WALL INTERSECTIONS T__ u OP a O]URSE AT NL CEllS N/ K]M FOfl R.F.G TOP Or Ff IF 11• R CAPIi� 'aL GPEAIER NVN 5'-4• -R — VN .14 N. 4 SHOM aft CUARY SECTION 3 HORIZ CONSTR JOINT IN MASONRY WALL SPV Ar b', lYP NIN RAZE S"E t-o• IeE Ar a• SHEARWALL SCHEDULE �1 WAN RT•1D00 � SILL BhiS SILL NNDNG flENNMS HGInV SEE 1 MIG��G G ; xV GIUDS Ai SCHEWIE DGN i1 - O I/P' MCx BE Ar 8' S�• IBE Ai 8' PRONOE 3x8 W. UON (Gj IBE ON PVN Ar V-C uID C Ai Sfl1 EACH ENO M NEV. 0 fiLOtNNG IXnr IBE Al IP I—EIED EFI�I 0.Y EDGES MIEEE NNLS - 1xV SLAGS Ai mfE EXCEED 8'-0' PRONDE DGIBIE SLAGS WHEN OPENING z I8', U. D r ER.1. OciSIDS V 0 , mo xC .rf \ (-r GR HMZ) EYCEIDSET-O• ET12 Ar Cx M x sPV .•ter AF L. _ _ _ PI-DOPENNGEMNMER iR 8'-0' — Ofl HIAZ ;8ds�m NLL IE]GHr ": . I �x L Ar V'-0' U. 9' O=pNo,o FiI �i,,�i '�i,; PLn000 III 5N°s�RLO"°"c TYPICAL STUD WALL FRAMING sLL 2 nor ro s_ - SE£ SCHEWIE NlElblE—E ,� � srM,mi PLn000 mCES Ar IIO' Ii Y l i�J� •: ' Pxuui am e g Ali Ff PL1lOOD IN-- 'iI li Jr0 nuK u�o EE m I uwarsrs loa AiNNDNC e• ^ La nanscRino :.:;' • • m`csRaEPSRsira NFORAIAON^ 't^ m E£ - PL1A000 Z - \ / sILL NOLrS Ofl - - -' SILL JdSrS di l0.USSES GUE 0.n000 Ar JdSf/ANSs FOfl ...NGNNIM _ BOORS r0 JMR RBO�UNOEA SEE 91�Q v F co ATYPICAL SHEARWALL DETAIL A Z nor ro scnc (DTYP PLYWOOD DIAPHRAGM SHEATHING AT ROOF, UON s Lu In not ro 5WE �:, L a. p o J SNDB Vx Nn IOD 1x SHIN SNO fllLL - Y O i iO—CONCEAI BGRLi«xERADms X - [L 5 U 2.g mcxaR BOLT ene�oa NI.PLrw EDGE nuunc, caxan. Ar (z) leE In u �RINx xuu�R P— AP = xG Rn0 JdNrS PLM9 nNDNC � w 0.NA SMG rRINK NNNNG PLM9 SHrG _ Q J u / LLI m �8 �uNOFA SHFM NXLL I/VxV�N'-i a OEO(ING m rn PER LONG (GKWNIZm) J Ix CauC PER IACH J rn Lu (ss) sos PEAoRoosEancAanc J 0°Gs OENnHOLDOWN SCHEDULE Z" Pm NxOR Ou . HHDDI I-m.s 1-I/2x_.nrY—1. OJ UU dT cw€� sNPsox sos/.a scRms X SECTION "X-X" GRAPHIC SCALE [� TYPICAL HOLDOWN AT CONCRETE SUPPORT /1DETAIL I SECTION D '• 8' �• o NDr ro rl/r=r-o• � � axc eNx iR0556 NOT sHNN1 PPR W. PER SAVP PER PVN 0.NA SHfC CONi ] 8 0A .� i0P PL It CONT ATEN N BO xR- (55) n YT Px FASC41 Cxc R 9 SECTION sae rlje' = I -o SN 5 RN,FAS NHERE OCUIRS 1—HERi NIO 2z ex N000 ecw PER PM E/.- OA EPWIEQ TNiEAilEO R005 Ai T,) cxu — 2 SECTION sae rl/s' = I -o 3 DETAII/s -LIPLAN sael-o 3 DETAII/xL I PLAN uxe I--0 GRAPHIC SCALE 0 i' 6' T a� - VxIR flk"IEA `L 1 gxU gUE VxIR flM"RA ° fll(G G sIUE , w L'4 ° •TMNss u�w.clrtr IN sIATS N SIEEL PL -- NFNdxC Pu Bx18 fiEMI ' BJR JqM, I I/R __�_� I/tfi•INX CIP -_t—_-0 NO Lpl e6� §b'o 6yy 3 i�9 �od�d INV' THI( xV• OE 55 PL (V) }/V M -- - - -�� �Bxlfi BVN 55 TMflU-13— Q EA 90E/V• -_ --_ -_ --MI V LONC IRx1R aLwJ PWT NEAE mm _ -_- __ __ -_ Ss U-BRAa(Ef _ OCWflS) -- _- d (}) }/V• M 5} TMNU-80.15 IRxIR CWVN POS g EO EO .) SECTION SECTION �CL g 9xC U 9NE _ VxIR flM"IFP� fiurt JONL I/IB• NAY GW VxIR flk"RA flKG FA SIDE - - _ ca J 0 o N < Nmz IN SRII PL Z W _ w + C o O 0 < Tr aM I I/'• - _�_� I/18'IINx CIP _ 0 CC Z /�•TMN xs• OE SS PL ss)TMRU B�OLTs ___ ___ �flIOGE LL�c �•= U� Q J 9 U y G 9UE „m 9 L` Bx8 POST (Mlfli OCgIflS) TAT '/� I' as _- _- __ SS U-BRNY(Ef m J w m �EO EO - _ GRAPHIC SCALE J O� x(DI -0ECT » SE u }• fi•Ox R• a o I d..� in LEGEND AND ABBREVIATIONS GENERAL NOTES —NC —I— PIPINO NEW SMITARY PIPING 1. ML YDM a•„ COMPLY TH ME —1 MOPIED STATE MD WGL CODES AS N01 AS BNAD W N— REGUIAIIONS. � P E rn G COW rFR P - XI n WA LNG P E THE NOPK FEOURED CON5515 OF PENFOPNNG AIL VBOfl MD NRNSHNG FlXTWES EOHPIENT REQUIRED TO Q � y I ---NEW COW WATER PIPING AIL YAIENWS, MD PRONDE A COAPI£IE HST—ORM OF ALL PWNSING SYSTEMS IS ®� Z 8 - - - - - - E%ISDNC VENT PIPING .— N DE CONTRACT OOCUIENR. IT-- INGWff NRNSHNG MD INS— HG NL ASSOCAiEO ITEMS REAUIRD FOR ME e V A X N. Ix Ew —T P P G PROPER OP ON OF AIL PWIUMMG SYSTEMS INCWCNG BUT NOT A- ACCESS—). uN1EN TO DECMOAL COI — MD HWRUCHIC SYSIDI ON— o x Z = a g CoM —our To CRAff U—NOS ME GIMNMNADC. ODNMNING KINRAAIION TO A DECREE OF DE1ML CONSSIENr mM MDR SOME MD ADEQUATE TO COMLY (E) EXISTING ME DESGH INTENT ME CONMACTOR Is RESMNSIBE FOR NA,AGIION OF NL A- ONgISIONS, WGIIGNS MD CON.—H AGO FLAOR —our PC FLOOR DRAIN PRIOR TO ARE PURCHASE OF MY UAIWMS MD CCAVENCEMER OF NCRK. NOAl ME MCNEM OF AIL DISCIEPMOES ROF mLL MFECF ME NOSK FOR RESOWDON. e `S @ do£o xAwAllcouxry lxDRIN EngcvcmE HE HE xXl6IE a UV LAVATORY 4. EQUIPUENT MD WIFRUL SHORN ON .—R. ARE BASE ONMO ARE. 11 ME OESIGNERS AUNIxxTR —Ru MOFES40NAL OPNION, RWffSENTAME OfIYPICM SIZES.ML coNNERcwE BUNDxc Engcv EEE[IENvsinxwRDs q=qua; NPR UR URINPL EQUIPMENT MD WTERUL FRONDED SH- AT MMN ME SPACE �CEMLL OENCEB BHNL fA GM AIL EOUIRIEN, FlXRR6. A1D SEITH _ RC WATER CLOSET ACCESS AND CLEARANCE CG H.— NTH ME Q.— COR-10A MD OTHER MMFS TO MACCE55 PROVIDE S MD GMMAHCE INSFUL ML EDUPIENT MD —N-- VlcooFT11215PEccwiFwx AUErouE IPISPER IwRI IBA I DGAESfIC WAIER PUMP SCF®ULE IlA1FPoMS PER UMa-AURFR5 MSMUGAGNS. S a IPNENr. MD MA GMER torn THAT SCMmuLw ®S00 NO RIES SNI- AGIOGDNI I BOOSTER P, N CAN. U PSI BDOS1, (I) I HP, 115/I/80). 51 MPS, 51MMIESS STER CENMRM PIMP, Wo REE A... S—. SPEC OP FED, IS APPROVED MD PUIMDED, IT IS ME ffSPONSIBu1Y W ME CONTRACTOR TOCOOR➢M91E MD —DE R N4➢ UDURES mu mow@ MW WIIC EIRMISEN . R, WANE FROWILY MAE MD OMR REQUIRED DENS mmE WMq TIC ThI000-INS-O Flk FILWE OR NPRYND FNw MD SANCE CONNECDONS MD WOO ME SAGE MATTED FOR AOsc— MO CLEMWCE REOUIR]AFMS. MI5 xCwDES Ni 5 NOT oxsmucnox —DENTS v® wA Umm TO REVISED PGMR HATER, CONTROLS, HYOMIXICS, NNSDE morns, FUEL FWEs Ara Wlr REauIR1AENn em: WATER TANK SCHEDULE lzczcNO3s] GROUND, WFM& 3p00 CMd1 CITY. H. DE N MWNR ENS tlEBI 6. CODflD ER ALL WGDCNS MO SIZES OF SDa CORM. ACRE MO COIL PENEMAIIONS mM HIE CENWL CONIHM10fl MD HaNDE eNOSE GDM MA MVRAED, IN K61BNR — DRMRN: MTEfl USX[ SEE —A. S Na —I FOR-.- HIMANDDOLI MD RESSENENM. SAIDER IX... OR MflMfD EUHL COR�ff REOURDEDIE-- Ai ML ARE RAIEN VNL CDUNG. PUCF MD 16 N027 PLUMBING FIXTURE SCHEDULE ). AT ME COUP-M OF IRE VORK MD PRIOR TO ME FlXK21 corrMa. M PMrs OF ME WM Sw1 BE THOROUGHLY CLEWED. AXQS� A -DREG E VCASE, NEA BONSHED DOI14 I I/r TOP SAID, CM ECT CrPS, SRO, EIUS UNEFER, FlAOR NOUxT, 6. ML PR NG SHML BE CONCEUFD IN WM < MD BEH NO HIED ryeeax-xGE0lCA1Ul39 212 FLOW CHIEF, I.6 MO I.G OFF. HUBER K96MZ-B W MARRED EOLUL OPEN FflOAT DANGATED MIST SAT NAMSHNGS INIE55 OMOMSE INDIC— EIPOSEG PIPING IN FlNISHED MEAS SHML BE CHROME HARD mM A CHROME HARD EKMS IEMUM IW510NEM. 1.6/IA CPF, TOP SRO, EswiClEGxni FMI FlxISIEG FNMVYEUr. Q 96W RES III-I.8/I.I OR m—NEB ECUL 9. ML PING SHML BE RUN PMNOEL N BUHUNG ONES MD BE -3413 = Z NC AXOSWE VA1ER CASs. DRfihD BOB, I I/T 10P 9V0. S PGAT D MD MCHORED AS REQUIRED RI F UOUE EXPANSION MD OR—KKI. ML PIPING SWL BE ODRQ LED EXCEPT N426 I. tAOI apA _ q% W NIffNS CHM BC1 CPS, SRO, PWSIONERR, HGOR NONT, ROCA OMET, 1.6 MO 1.0 CPT, HOMIER K-9M51-8 OR —NE0 EOLUL OPEN MOOT DOIGMD OUBET 4Ar GNHN5HE0 SPACES. INSANE M REOUIREO 10 IELT ML CONSDNCBON CONUIDWs MD DI AILON NR NS�OADON OF oMER WITH re UIW EE F Z W _ J EKHSEO NMUX —M. 1.6/IA WF, TOP SRO, NEW ING APING EXPOSED TO C AWCM MD DECMOK CONDUIT. AIL MEV SWL FBBEE ROUTED AS HIGH AB POBBIBE MD RI ME UNDEA90E ub ^�Ym^e�w•reirem. [CUBE p N _ _ 9AW RES III-I.B/I.I O6 MiflNEO EUUUOF W y A-Ufl AXQS�E UH-VME IOUROG. l/4' iW SOD. 0.15 GWM5 IG COXIR,1Cr ppCUIENTSR<ME FO BE WVIHEO HVKIR T.CONSMUCFON11 IamRe mH _relre.g. G03415 a5[LUl12l6a[L615 PEB,RISM. OKER X-1991-Efl5 M WRMFD EWN. qP'6➢ f1A510YE1FP, G. CMIXXIS RA f1ASH. TOPQOPEN AXMNSr EXISTING COXDIBONs, UPUIEs Ma NEV COMMIICIION. NL IamReremH s¢xr�g UIUI]15aGU15 p ® COMANN SAIN 166U.—U. OR MVRAED EWA, FlOOfl HllNBNC SYSIFNS SHML HIwE flOHF W WAY OEA NL OTHER NIIAING MIEN GOIPoNENR. a a - d Q o- W - i N EGTLIP G,�rexb���r,Area MLW M.OS�E UmNOLM. VNL NO Am U.— FOR GOtlEW➢ MN, SNOLE U. HOSE FOR I—. UMER RKOI OR XVRW40 11 ML EUrnxC B1lwxc MO sIrt fFAMRES xGr BExG u1W!➢ Br TH5 P�.IECi AfE 10 ff HSOIECRD FREII DAMAGE. CONINOioR �....... � Q `R¢"r. UIUrz LLo z - a_ EOLUL MN C— FCE EVOSD PIPING AGGH MOUNTED SUPPORT, SHNL RWMR NL WYfE OCCUR LNG To EXSBNG CONSMUCIION ax NeM�`dwok. W W 6 Q J co 901E EYIDAOLI, Xm ROLN6H-N MCaS, ZLPoI 11-1 Ofl EGUB, CMSD BY ME GMA—RS OPEIODONS AT HSARER EPENff TO -_ m W DECK NCMFD SNiE MOLE SUCLE SPRY IEIEMN SMK FMAET, 10 G. IEFANR 11/4 WMNL PROOF NW NETERa PUSH ME GOUA— SADSFMDON OF ME om1ER. 11. ME HLABNG CONMA - IS A.-... FOR —DI— AIL ®meg��.reirev. UIU64 iEs (/J m 0 - Z fIICGG FNOET ll]�65PSUMW W MVRW40 En. IS VORK UNDER HIS/HER GONMACr mM NL OUEA BID— DNAES. HODI ME MCUM,r OP AIL DISH—. OR WESDONS 5:1nau.:: wre _ - J W O (� NW SMKreMfwP� I—T TEFRMM 6- RON OUrSOE GIa RUN AR. IMIFK ,. SMXIESS SIP..D M15MA44 OR XVOREO ECVL PEAMNING TO EXIENr OF WORE( PROP TO BIDDING.-- 1]. ate. AECIwxtAi ExcixEER Q MB HOSE -. ARID-SMM —UN BEARER, IGW BJO IFM ERE CONM.SCTOR MD ML A—, REWRENENR MR IMT DON, OPENINGS, — S PUCE CONNECTIONS. MS _ ]/i NME HUSE DEEM wDEf x, MaAMOD — .. OR MPflOSfD FAVL CRfSlO MD UDUTY INOADES BMWPOPINC DENQS, PmNr WENS ACCESB WENNDS. SEES MD o 0 -DUN 5 M1 W-A1 W IWPBhO [nw STER DIMDEf EBX 14. INSTML HORZONFK DRNNIAE PIPING WITH NINIANN SLO£ OF 1/4' uvossmw.ox mll o PER NOT WHDS POSSIBLE Bur NOT LESS MM 1/a- PER Na ix e ^II o� z-A za I a, III k ;Z(E)l ;S7 L lw (E)4-S. SE PWN— R.R pl (PPINCE)/I (E)l 1/4�,M W co PIANG A— M Pl— - R— (E).- & .—ES Z w iL LL, 0 O�PLUMBING DEMOLITION SITE PLAN ��Bl�,G DEMOLITION PLAN 2 4 dL Lu o 0 0 0 a®� �, `i ---- >» iiHcnm ii/mm }Hnrnro Infiu IT. r�€�Ea _ VD _ ru�c eu o u v M.w ]MA em em 1 1TT0 uv o o o --------------- macs rox am 1 P.I v7 z z _ w w _ g Y (if (If < Qaw a a� a oa< o m a w¢m m N NO m J a Lu o - rG o zA 0 -.2 2-1 \, z a 2':1.,- 2' In 1 ­-'l "14n5l w -q 12'1 IT 1 4 TU 2' 2� I 12- 1 Y 1 3,4 NS 9 2— ;j —T MW\�/�\ �»~ 4- In InI cn Lu ING DIAGRAM z ,�lll IG D AGRAM N I LtRY P I P L5L, Of o- sco -lo L<L, dm Lu < ti Z. PNEUMnnc ExPANNION TnNN VMMBLE FREQUENCY DRIVE PREssuRE TRANS—ERZ DO " = PRESSURE RELIEFVFLYE PRESSURE -GE 135" PUMP DISCHARGENNiWA PEADm�ESS ?ZooJ¢ -'LKi TEFC NTRIFU6- PUMPNUTGRN1FH 9 PUMP Suaic 9p) LOVEDSPRING SILENT (V`)� TINH Flu CDNNELTON CHECK VIL4E\ 315 225 P.—ER FRVE— 2]Q ISOMETRIC VIEW ciun R' owN MeN PEE THREADED �Nrm �(acn 2s' /// PLNi roe Locnnox) EXTERNAL DDWN PIPE O _ WCIIiHMTE01(IIREMENFSiE UDDER PER TANK _ N SUPRUER) RRES REOURE S iµF — 17 17 — — SUPPoH] FlTIING WR.ETINIa LEFT END VSUPPORT E➢ IEW FRONT VIEW coup NEum—URER�sN >O o "N F u vuvE M rra nFouIRFMFNn p (-I, SEEEv my —R 9 Y MIER) Qaw ¢ a DOMESTIC WATER PUMP DETAIL 0-- a u=. NDNF�e � siRucNURnL owes 0-> Q J J a s Lu ~ mLu _ u) e 0 a �RUPDRINK,J Lu Ma wWRKLUUFALNRER ACCDFDANCE TANK O U J nEQUIRFME—Q rG o O 2 WATER STORAGE TANK DETAIL mIII a F. NDNF STRNNFA HEN CMT I�x CIEINIXIf VIM LLLL NWT PWG Uff �IFNIOUT SINE 4ZE p'Ix uxH EMSS PwC n S NNN UP TO NA% pl&1NG Ofl CONCRETE WNH T U e Q y P I FlNISHEQ FlADfl KEEP HRE FlNBHED FlAgt ROUND IAIUST<BIE SECURED NICKEL BPONZE ttW, SIATIEO CIASUPE RUC OF 4'Y FINISHED CRI➢E� Z q e Z A ^ YU10mNWFlNO NDIBWIE ..,�, y U SEEPAGE PAI _ B N IN �tlINC COLLIR zoo=mg WNC SVB G� -�^F- VMOfl BMRIEN (INHERE- - I/Y' ffN0 iZ @ Q£o=¢ ITURN DONN IN—). INTO HUB AID SEAL VIM E—T - SINNMr -E• WISIE UHE p-—FE ONE Ile BWD. LONG FWC IF END CONDNION €?NoaZ 0FLOOR DRAIN DETAIL P.M FLOOR CLEANOUT DETAIL • REDUCE WE VHERE WASTE UNE 5 VRCER MAI e LEANOUT TO GRADE DETAIL A. mauxo CVNYE PNhD n sIPPEr FIYM vxvE caul avi ESNfDEpI £ . \ J NUISTMIU: IHN IE PIArtO SUEK PIPE - SEVINf NL XbYO fn C plygID �` J I➢CaxC OnCE UBNL 6 z 3 � • J Eglf SRR PEE a � % � // Nf PIPEON SN I/Y' EIP� �t4) `o =FNISHED h.AA wolf ersE Part �_ LLI ec W QQ J �a �a rG LAVATORY MOUNTING DETAIL URINAL MOUNTING DETAIL- IE. xoxE Pare .NsssBc IE. xoxE - sEs NlalrtcnwL Bux�c's GENERAL ELECTRICAL NOTES I. suowN ON ELECTED— oaawiNcs SATE BE NEW UNLEes-EewisE NOTED, D 'T aI DART E eEPn�eI SE A aT No rnsT,o,uE CouN,w. allo°Ec°RLauNo°�°E�.�Es AURROLNEINcwriN`CIE5, CUNCT�oN saxes callouITs AND r�,T�Nas TO NaTc« am r AND TERMINATIONS —L BE MADE m "UNCTION aoxES AND `. SIT ONLY e. TD aaD�o�NoNTS�EDCDNTR TDR saaLL CDDRD�NaTETae wDRa w�a DTaER TRADESP DIRER E ENEN = DT R= PRD E 11 NOT TIOR IN REAN, RESOLVED ANSI I OF L wR�����No��Cas,LLo6, IN TIE EVENT IF aN �BLER� DRAwN�MEDIAULC aR NIETY ED D IRANI' IRILUTe NITALLED IN ACCORD US WTI 2CDDITTLRENTNLPLRALaDNDRRLI TIE LAID FOR IINDUF�NPIIV RE OILER �aR=�N WIDEaR�rERIeET.ETC�) DD s (w E GRaa ,TREE CONTINUOUS, ®o um ®o o PM « u ECS, INC. woNOE"E". DII "1 sse,a EGA I TO, El AT PC IALL omm O=aoa —SE. IFII TIRE, III NEMI TIRE SECURTI SURVEILLANCE SYATEM GULLET GET, I JUNCTION LARGE WALL DOHNTED -A PAN ELBOARD _u) WCONDUIT �- � z=� =mw — o§ NUMBER CONCEALED IN CEILING OR &LEI NDIC'FE ­-' OF NF- WITTIG FACEI NAER IF OVERHEAD IELECOMMUNICAURN CONDUCTORSa Fii ELECTRICAL SYMBOL LIST � MOUNTING HEIGHT SCHEDULE M (svL aM aare�To NEW cR�P,iaN �o � TINTED �""�NwRE csN LE RE��. TEE n.o RULE ti,auNTLo LUN�NwRL mauRLe Ream. sEe a . MOUNTED (NUMERAL �N CIRCLE �RRE�DNDs TO LRN�NwRE �RLDRLE� �EDM�Na�RECL��NDDR�EMMDD�ED�NRNERa<�NGRC��RRE�DNDSTDLDM�NwRE D�LE� L MOUNTED (NUMERAL �N CIRCLE CORRESPONDSTO LRN�NwRE �RLDRLE� �RT�T��mL��T��T�D� $� �eD,zTT a a a �— NOTE INDICATOR �TwLNDCaTaRRDTTaNRaLTDLNDTEeTREETNDMRER �R.N R�RRrN� EN ��RrN� wNRE �� o �� �MAR� No�,E��RREN T RRDw TO PaNELDDaaD LEnER ND�TEe PaNELE,DaRD NDMDERs ND�TEe NDD�TDLLDw�LaRDELDwTLaDRs� _eDRr_ _aR�_ ECS, INC. O� POLE 3��=0 LUM NE�rooLE SEE �AL s LILSAM s � o RE iw co Lcvn Po Es SEE L,nNR R, sA,RN — aaa.� REMRLs� R e x z Nh 2P I J Z AN IE * o F - ���kkk Bl2s Ro Ba U REMOVED Cam_. .... IS, o/RELY v Z � i w cJ CONCRETESEE o a F w ` Q J Ew n,Eo� _ PC PEED 72 • w m SEE CE Aar °� vl AWA ®ELECTRICAL SITE PLAN U;�11�1 LE 20 C GRAPHIC SCALEa }- \l — 4 4 4 Q Q71 - ® g2 )COMFORT STATION LIGHTING PLAN ® (4� COMFORT STATION ELECTRICAL PLAN GRAPHIC SCALE ECS, INC. - - - -- - - ----- ----- - --- sue. LEE ,zo LC' P, iw --- -----'I - - - - Poa,��E �E�� oa P�N allo ° I LE I PC ---------------------- -�-------------------- ------ ---- - - ---------- 3F , c TO zP'-DOUBLE „ TFFcw',RL" To- -"-- — 4 wP SEc211I BOx FOF ® - ,PP�N� FOR E - P------------ 3- NEZP---C ------- ---- �P , T - w111 PL-PING.,PTENAL -r - CEPSQUARE 1x 'ER' STEM WP EoL EFNN,�ON Fc cc - -- o - - zP,cca PAVILION ELECTRICAL PLAN E03.1 s uE ,/a'= i'-o NOTES. TFROW SNITCH ➢iRAC NNEc,SATCl ✓t ,o IOINT POLE O PANEL rzP usEo Tc ccN,acrz PaviwoN RECEPTACLES_ 2 UP T ROOF z c wnF Puus,Fmc RINLED AT 'NELEC MNUNiCVTiaNS r' iCVL FOR 2 s INV FTEF oW ` as awF FPTTEFr BAN' - - -- ® 2 ELECTRICAL ROOM PLAN NaFTF E03.1 sruE: i i'-o GRAPHIC SCALE /a' , -c bi ECS, INC. 217 a ---Il------------ C_A. qq sqq s— POLIO — _--—=—=,—_--=——=--_�,=—=—=----=—= —_—— — —, -- — —— — �� s ----------- - - ----- - - —- s - - - -� - —'f - - —r --- --- ---— —<-- — —— -- — -- — ------------------ ®PAVILION LIGHTING PLAN scare /a ,—o GRAPHIC SCALE 1'. ECS, INC. z In Q z LU W =z LU _� W 0 <a d Uz< Q J W m m — I —N J In W OJ U c€ o N M � FO ECS, INC. P=0. o aox 00�0000�0000000000000000 �¢ > Y O a = o —CAL roe ae zg Lu Q J 0] � Q J W � U c€ ® PAVILION ROOF ELECTRICAL PLAN GRAPHIC SCALE o M rvaerN scaer: Va r-o'A I A 11 11- �_ M INSULATED END RUNNING RE ANB BOLA -ON _ pRM TTANGROLE WRR COVER ECON�B'"�LBMINPI BEB A OM NUM BGLT G ART ARIA rNNfRE aCJIRs) �W,T�OROUNORP NRE�sEEOWMINAIRE IIIEWIj R F6NBARE CG L ORN_ WIRE ANOOrzEo B aNZ[ nRT NORGAVEED TRO OR NINI IELIPE DIED x SCHEDULE TUBER o OTE aPE RLCOMNINNATIGNs LEVELING NFLs (B TOTAL) ECS, INC. DIAMETER. ANOBIZEo BRONZE EININ �-P RGLE Iiz"A INI' AN NANu-FIRED °EOURE"A°N:sRR �' '� a Rfa EINIsuEo cRACE� BOMB IERTIcpL REWEORarvc nR MA n[s a" aN CENTER CONCRETE sIGEWALA PoLE BASE sEE NCR E TGGG PT IN AB GAn���� ��EEG PANEMEM �RB AERE G�GRs) �� �M OAT WAP� TO 3NNNG RON COPPERCLAR , CAL RE NIOR BARS WBN MA TIES ® B ON CENTER 1 LIGHT POLE DETAIL �2� LIGHT POLE BASE DETAIL E04.0 N T TO sraLE E04.0 N T TO SCALE _ PAVING OR SIDEWALK, PAUINc are smEwuu. REFER TO IlL DRAWN1s REFER To IIZIDsAwINOs - -S raR REGHNE.ENTs FOR REO11u) F canoE _caAGE �= Z W =.W W C—ACTED O VrLL > �¢ o -�mIA 1'K 5 d U BACxFILL k LENGTH of DUCT EMIR[ IZE ns INOIPa�ZEo LENOTR OF OUCI BELIW ENTIRE¢ QoUA_, AND J INDICATED SIZE AS Lw m N SAND FLL _ _J $'a � JOw U ¢ c€ CINGIE,IPSI m se BAvs �� TYPICAL DIRECT BURIED DUCT SECTION CONCRETE ENCASED DUCT SECTION ui: NOT TOSCALE BEM E�Tre�AM �ON DA„Ere�Es ECS, INC. WORLD 0 z—°sc "Ell uONOEDED. uI Pcc,° /z"2 3a — — PER S,re�ND. o ,Ms OR _ _ _ _ s s u gR IND Sol, ,2D% aOV. ,m, 3W O 6 oe�Tm 1C.US. -- -- -- a ,Ms crvo211 � spec OOAAcO E oa EAcu s,amc c FE "All, eNF �Ms ONE KW "� 3/°-c. INACICIP , o/za'/"A' R O ys crvo NOTES: 3ps. O PH N _ a D ANE, z DAFEA W E o °iz°'POEw. _ �s �Nre o EM INNACCORDANCE SIT'LANNEC s9csd(A) AND 7o6,,(re). UUD,WTA°w O 3«D. O ere MEET WIT, P� ALUMINUM D OND o�E DOx wrere SPRING D AEre �s. Nreeea`LLeoe,zw/eeea,w ,Me cNo PANEL zP uAr BE ENERGZED iN 'ME OPEN POPIN = ` 3, RE OR. CMDAF, /2"C. 3�2, (PEE NrnEMPIN reACCOFDANCE WnDE APPROVED S,OPTWL�NC — ,Mz cNo G 1 ONE LINE DIAGRAM „Ere z z EOS.p N .ELE 'ME Pv SVS,EM MANUMCOLUREP OR SUPPLIER — W (7 EMS, INVERTER, BETE s, RE AND DC DC D ANEL GINNE F SMALL 5WFIHES RBE AND oIV o1111 NI resoa A A = W a COMPLETE AND OPERATIONAL OFF -GRID Pv srsEM. > _ z" wEATHErereEAD O _ x w w �a Q w PDusTI NO O OIL Q J msuiAT o MsE CNOEEN PLvwO 21 HI pa^MTreicu1%RAFTED T eoA _ N J Lu W U U ¢ c€ ELECTRODE cNDNomc Q SF s TELECOMMUNICATIONS DIAGRAM uii LUMINAIRE SCHEDULE 1 NOMINAL PHTOSENCOR LENGTH W �r NPF cues. aeo oEGREEErMisnlmrc TIME BEuv AND POLL LEuc MEN �s„uv uRsuERIBBEB FRCs,Eu Pusx�BONA.E E WE, ®® o®�®eeo�oe mm mm®o®mom®eeo�me • o®®om�so®me mm�ossom�so®me MMMMMMMM FllClIlRN mlmlm�=l ECS, INC. ¢ 6 s a omd R T-V a PANEL 2P :P°osA�P�wN B'REP�R wIRL MCUN.INA suRFavE - Fl,o LED RECEGGED, CEILING MOUNT, I FEES' LONG. NOMINAL 21 MDE. 11 CAUSE PAINTED - GE 11 — — — — CaoiPAA�� s � Rn z W o >os —¢R �O o PC P2 0 LL,LL, d SLID - F Q J NEUTRAL WHITE VATT G W m — m N SINGLE J Lu GUY IND GREEN WALL W RELAv 0 OCCUPANCYSENSORIWALLSWITCHCONTROLSCHEMATIC uill Na scALE ME MOTION SEN L sem"as 3 SIT LUMEN. TRUE AMBER ARE FIVE A EIUVALENT LED CEILING MOUNTED ENCLOSED ADD GAPIETED FIBERGLASS INDUSTRIAL I LESELTNlMlR LENGTH, WHITE BASED ENIEL FINISH IV lEllml FILING TAMIE1 DF C 360 COUNTERSNK FLAT HEAD 'OR' SCREV6 XH CENTER PIN REJECI, VHIPE PROYDER C09 To LOST ADD R RATIO ElIAL NES REFRACTORS S�TAEEYD 'A ARRIK L DAVID V. IGE GOVERNOR OF HAWAII qp u 7959 se �wz y5 y a lr `os�ynd and /ydr`iy � w STATE OF HAWAII SrareofHavrd�s DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION KAKUHIHEWA BUILDING 601 KAMOKILA BLVD., STE 555 July 15, 2022 KAPOLEI, HI96707 Maurice C. Messina, Director County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 6 Hilo, HI 96720 mauric e. messinaghawaiicounty.gov Dear Mr. Messina: SUBJECT: Chapter 6E-8 Historic Preservation Review — Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility Improvements Request for Project Effect Determination Archaeological Inventory Survey Miloli`i Ahupua`a, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 SUZANNE D. CASE CHAIRPERSON 130ARD OF LAND A.ND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAUEMENT ROBERT K. MASUDA FIRST DEPUTY M. KALEO MANUEL DEPUTY DIRECTOR — WATER AQU A I IC RESOI ICES BOATINC AND OI EA .N RE( PCEATION BUREAU OF'CONVhYANChS COMMISSION ON W.A'FEIt RESOURCE FI.ANAC,EM FN'I CONSUILV.A'IION .AND COAS'F.AL LANDS CONSCRVATIONANDRESOURCES ENFORCEMENT ENCINEERINC NOI<LSIItY AND WILDLIFE HISTORIC PRESERVATION K AHOOLANVE ISLAND RESERVE COMMISSION LAND STATEPARI4S IN REPLY REFER TO: Project No. 2019PR31760 Doc. No.: 2207SNI I Archaeology This letter provides the State Historic Preservation Division's (SHPD's) review of the County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation's (COH DPR) request for a project effect determination for the Miloli`i Beach Park Accessibility improvements project and the supporting document titled, An Archaeological Inventory Survey TMK (3) 8-9-004:001), Miloli'i Ahupua'a, South Kona District, Island of Hawaii (Haim and Henry, July 2019). SHPD received the draft archaeological inventory survey (ATS) report on November 13, 2019. On July 1, 2022, SHPD requested a County of Hawaii project initiation and effect determination letter to be submitted. The letter was received by SHPD on July 15, 2022. The project area consists of an approximately 0.6-acre portion of the entire 1.41-acre parcel. The land is owned by County of Hawaii. Haun and Associates conducted the archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of the project area at the request of COH DPR. The project improvements consist of removing the existing comfort station and its reconstruction in a more accessible location, installing a new storage and supply system for the comfort station, creating a new accessible route connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities, resurfacing and retrofitting the basketball court, and installing vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. A review of SHPD records indicates no previous AIS has been completed in the current project area. The Haun and Henry (2019) AIS report provides a summary of pre- and post -Contact history of the Miloli`i area up to recent. The fieldwork consisted of a 100% pedestrian survey of the project area with transects spaced 5 meters apart. Three newly identified sites were documented (Sites 50-10-65-31097, 50-10-65-31098, and 50-10-65-31099). Site 50-10- 65-31097 is a mortared stone retaining wall that extends along the north and west side of the Miloli`i Beach Park. It is interpreted as an historic boundary wall that separates the park from an adjacent house lot. Site 50-10-65-31098 consists of three discontinuous segments of a stone wall that extends along portions of the southern boundary of the Miloli`i Beach Park. Site 50-10-65-31099 is a basketball/volleyball court located in the southeastern portion of the project area. According to the County of Hawaii, the court existed when the parcel was used as a school ground. The County of Hawaii obtained the land in 1969, indicating that the court is at least 50 years old, making it an historic property as defined in §6E-2, HRS. No pre -contact archaeological sites or features are present in the parcel. This is likely due to the extensive historic and modern use of the project area, and potentially by the multiple tsunamis that have inundated the Milioli'i area. Maurice C.Messina July 18, 2022 Page 2 Hann and Henry (2019) indicate that Sites 50-10-65-31097, 50-10-65-31098 and 50-10-65-31199 retain sufficient integrity in location and materials and are assessed as significant under Criterion "d" for the information they have yielded. They further indicate that the mapping, written description, and photography conducted during the AIS adequately documented the three sites and that no further archaeological work is recommended. Sites 50-10-65- 31097 and 50-10-65-31098 will not be impacted by the current proposed project improvements. Site 50-10-65- 31099 will be improved to restore it to safe, and functional use for recreational purposes. SHPD agrees with the site integrity, significance assessments and that Sites 50-10-65-31097, 50-10-6531098 and 50-10-65-31099 have been adequately documented, requiring no further work. SHPD's project effect determination is "No historic properties affected." This AIS report (Haun and Henry 2019) satisfies the requirements of HAR § 13-276-5. It is accepted. Please send two hard copies of the document, clearly marked FINAL, along with a text -searchable PDF copy of the document and a copy of this acceptance letter to the Kapolei SHPD office, attention SHPD Library. Additionally, please upload a text -searchable PDF version of the final AIS to HICRIS Project No. 2019PR31760 using the Project Supplement option and send a PDF copy to lehua.k.soares(a)hawaii.gov. SHPD hereby notifies the COH DPR that the AIS has been accepted and that project initiation may proceed. Please contact Sean P. Naleimaile, Historic Preservation Archaeologist IV, at sean.p.naleimailekhawaii.gov for any matters regarding this letter. Aloha, '4Gae Wle gl_ Alan S. Downer, PhD Administrator, State Historic Preservation Division Deputy State Historic Preservation Officer cc: Jeffrey Ochi, jeffrey.ochi (a�hawaiicounty.gov Emi Tanitomi, etanitomi(a�bowengineering.com Alan Hann, ahaun(khaunandassociates.com Solomon Kailihiwa, sailihiwaghaunandassociates.com. 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacIOOS Data Services I Education Resources Regions zffi'-=Pad00S Waves Currents Shoreline Impacts Water Characteristics Weather Pi PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEAN 08SIAwNG SYSTEM Home / Shoreline Impacts / Sea Level Rise / State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer Sea Level Rise : State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer Planning Depi-. Exhibit 4 An lnteraM4f :MJM1M" 0 ,,,SuA#ort of the State of Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/slr-hawaii/ 1 /18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S •j'" ��;y� �` �� �� � SIM tau; 11l( ,7, � ' EST �""a'°"`"• ® �`" ^��"":„ W' sL46 .ati` TETRA TECH 0" As Funding provided by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) through their 2016 Regional Coastal Resilience Grants Program. A DISCLAIMER (updated November 27, 2018): Based on the methodology of sea level rise modeling used in the Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (Report) and the Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer (Viewer), having gone through peer review and publication in the Naturejournal Scientific Reports, the results of this study are sufficiently validated to be appropriately used in land management decisions as the best available information as of the date of publication of the Report, December 2017, consistent with the intent of Act 83 SLH 2O14 as amended. This Report is intended to provide a state-wide assessment of HawaiTs vulnerability to sea level rise. The location of projected impacts and economic costs from damages are estimates based on a particular sea level rise scenario. The hazard and vulnerability data and maps provided herein are based on observational data and computer -based models as described in the Report and in published research (Anderson et al., 2018). As with all models, it is important to understand the methods, assumptions, limitations, and uncertainties of the methods used. The risks associated with use or non-use of the results are assumed by the user. At its November 27th, 2018 public meeting, the Hawai'i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission agreed to replace the original Report Disclaimer with an updated Disclaimer, adapted here for the Viewer. The Commission's decision on this matter is detailed in meeting minutes from November 27, 2018. ® SUGGESTED CITATION: Hawai'i Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission. 2021. State ofHawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer. Version 1.11. Prepared by the Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PaclOOS) for the University of Hawai'i Sea Grant College Program and the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources, Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands, with funding from National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Office for Coastal Management Award No. NA16NOS4730016 and under the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources Contract No. 64064. http://hawaiisealevelriseviewer.org. Accessed [date]. NOTE: Additionally, please cite any data sources used and related publications as suggested in the dataset descriptions further below. C DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENT for residential real estate in the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area: The State of Hawai'i enacted an update to the Mandatory Seller Disclosures in Real Estate Transactions Law in 2021, codified within Hawaii Revised Statutes §508D-15, requiring that real estate transactions within the State of Hawai'i must disclose any risk of sea level rise to that property based on the 3.2-feet Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA). More information is available in the following resources: • Sea Level Rise Viewer Disclosure Requirements FAQs and Tutorial Video for Realtors (Hawai'i Realtors Association) • Disclosure Requirement for Residential Real Estate in the Sea Level Rise Exposure Area flyer (State of Hawaii) 8 If you have questions or comments about the resources and information contained on these pages, please contact B slviewer@hawaii.edu. Overview The Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer (Viewer) is an online, interactive atlas to support the Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report (Report) that was mandated by Act 83, Session Laws of Hawaii (SLH) 2014 and Act 32, SLH 2O17. A five-year update to the Report was completed in 2022 that provides an overview of the latest sea level rise science, an assessment of the accomplishments related to the 2017 Report recommendations, and updated recommendations. Please visit the Hawai'i Climate Change Portal website to view the full report and for more information on climate mitigation and adaptation. The Viewer is intended to provide map data depicting projections for future hazard exposure and assessing economic and other vulnerabilities due to rising sea levels. Users may view and download map data for: • Coastal hazard exposure areas with sea level rise including passive flooding (still water high tide flooding), annual high wave flooding (over wash during the largest wave events of the year), and coastal erosion. • An aggregate of the above hazard layers into a combined Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA). It should be noted that for the islands of Lanai, Molokai, and Hawaii, the SLR-XA represents only the passive flooding hazard due to the lack of historical data needed to model the other two https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 2/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S hazards. Vulnerability assessment layers, including potential economic impacts to land and structures and threats to coastal highways from sea level rise and coastal hazards. • Other base maps and overlays to support vulnerability assessment and adaptation planning include passive flooding with 6 feet of sea level rise from NOAA, a 1 %-Annual-Chance Coastal Flood Zone with 3.2 feet of Sea Level Rise (1 %CFZ-3.2) from the 2018 Hawaii Hazard Mitigation Plan, present day flood hazard zones, coastal geology, and TMK parcel boundaries. More details on these map layers are provided below. Guidance for integrating the sea level rise map data in planning and permitting is available at the Hawai'i Climate Change Portal. The Viewer was developed by the Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System (PaclOOS) at the University of Hawaii School of Ocean and Earth Science and Technology (UH SOEST) through a collaborative project led by the University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program (Hawai'i Sea Grant) in partnership witl DLNR and the State of Hawaii Office of Planning. The Report was developed by Tetra Tech, Inc. and the State of Hawaii Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Office of Conservation and Coastal Lands (OCCL). Coastal hazard exposure map data (passive flooding, annual high wave flooding, an coastal erosion) were developed by the Coastal Geology Group at UH SOEST. The combined SLR-XA and vulnerability assessment layers were developed for the Report and Viewer by Tetra Tech, Inc. The 1 %-Annual-Chance Coastal Flood Zone with 3.2 feet of Sea Level Rise (1 %CFZ-3.2) was developed by Sobis, Inc. and Tetra Tech, Inc. for the 2018 State of Hawaii Hazard Mitigation Plan. The passive flooding area with 6 feet of sea level rise comes from the NOAA Sea Level Viewer. Funding for the Viewer development was provided by NOAA through their 2016 Regional Coastal Resilience Grants Program and the DLNR through Act 83, SLH (2014). Sea Level Rise Projections For Modeling Sea level rise exposure mapping in the 2017 Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Report and Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer is based on an upper -end projection in the 2013 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report of 3.2 feet of global mean sea level rise by 2100. As expected, the science on sea level rise observations and forecasts has continued to advance. Since completion of the 2017 Report, peer -reviewed scientific literature as well as government and multinational reports increasingly point to 3 to 4 feet of sea level rise by 2100 as a mid -range, rather than high -end, scenario for Hawai'i. These increasing projections of sea level rise are based on greenhouse gas emissions, which continue to increase, and observations of accelerating ice mass loss to the oceans, particularly from Greenland and West Antarctica. The projections are often provided to 2100, though sea level is committed to rise for centuries to millennia according to the 2021 IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC 2021). Since 1993, 27 years of continuous satellite altimeter measurements tied to tide gauges and averaged across the planet (Figure 1) show that global mear sea level is rising at a rate of 3.56 mm/yr (1.40 inches per decade) and has accelerated to 4.42 mm/yr (1.74 inches per decade) averaged over the past decade (February 2013 - February 2023, AVISO+ Satellite Altimetry Data). Global mean sea level rise is accelerating at a rate that will lead to 23 cm (9 inches) by 2050 (relative to the year 2000; Nerem et al., 2022). Continued global warming is expected to increase this rate of acceleration, and therefore inches of sea level rise by 2050 is likely a conservative (low -end) sea level rise scenario for that timeframe. — Quadratic fit 40 Observed GMSL 20----------.^-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------- . E E 0- - 20- -40 -60 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 Figure 1. Global mean sea level is rising at a rate of 3.56 mm/yr (1.4 inches per decade, AVISO+ Satellite Altimetry Data) and this rate is accelerating (Figure: Nerem et al., 2022). The most recent projections of global and regional sea level rise are published in a 2022 interagency report led by NOAA (Sweet et al., 2022). The 2022 report builds on a 2017 NOAA report (Sweet et al., 2017) and global mean sea level rise scenarios from the IPCC Sixth Assessment Report (IPCC 2021). https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 3/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S Key findings of the 2022 interagency sea level rise report include: • Increased confidence, regardless of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions scenario, in sea level rise projections at 2050 with sea level expected to rise as much over the next 30 years as it has over the last 100 years. • An increase in magnitude and frequency of coastal flooding by 2050 from high tide and storm surge flood events with significant consequences to coastal infrastructure, communities, and ecosystems. • A SO% probability of exceeding 0.5 m (1.6 ft) of sea level rise globally by 2100 with an increase in average global temperature of 2'C above preindustrial levels (global temperature has already risen 1.1 'C since 1880 (https://climate.nasa.gov). The probability of exceeding 0.5 m (1.6 ft) of global sea level rise increases to 80% to 99% under higher GHG emissions scenarios with 3'-5'C of warming, respectively. These probabilities do not consider the potential for faster -than -projected ice sheet losses in Antarctica and Greenland within this century, which is a focus of ongoing research. • There is a 50% probability of exceeding 1.0 m (3.3 ft) and 10% probability of exceeding 2.0 m (6.6 ft) of global sea level rise by 2100 when considennf a high GHG emissions scenario that leads to an average global temperature increase of 5'C plus the impact of earlier and faster ice sheet losses from Antarctica and Greenland. While physically plausible, the likelihood of widespread ice sheet collapse to that extent within this century is currently unknown and is an active area of ongoing observation and research. Long-term observational data from local tide gauge stations show that sea level is rising around Hawai'i. Models indicate that Hawai'i and other tropical Pacific sites will experience sea level rise that is 16% to 20% higher than the global average (Sweet et al., 2022). The 2022 interagency report provides a range of regionalized sea level rise scenarios based on differing GHG emissions pathways and associated global warming and ice sheet melt (all projections relative to sea level in the year 2000): • Sea level will rise around Hawai'i between 0.7 and 1.5 feet by 2050. • The Intermediate (mid -range) estimate is for a rise of 1.0 feet by 2050. • Sea level will rise between 1.3 and 8.0 feet by 2100. • The Intermediate (mid -range) estimate is for a rise of 3.9 feet by 2100. 4 aU y 3 rn -1 4- 1970 Low confidence processes including rapid ice sheet melt and marine ice sheet disintegration, COMBINED WITH very high emissions and global warming contribute significantly to the Intermediate, Intermediate -High, and High sea level rise scenarios. Emissions uncertainty, or the amount of future emi; and associated global warming, drive long-term diffl between the Low, Intermediate -Low, and Intermedial level rise scenarios. ---------------------------------- Process uncertainty, or how well sea level rise processes are understood and can be modeled, is represented as the shading above and below the median values. ----------------------- Observational data show that sea levels are rising and the recent trend is accelerating. Historic Record i Near -Term 2000 2020 2050 2.0 A1.5 Cn co n� 1.0fD 0.5 c 0.0 Long -Term 2100 Tide Gauge Observations Low Intermediate -High Observation Extrapolation Intermediate -Low High Intermediate Figure 2. Sea level rise observations (solid black line), extrapolated observed trend (dashed black line), and sea level rise scenarios for Hawai'i from the NOAA-led interagency sea level rise report (Sweet et al., 2022). The text in the figure describes the various processes and uncertainties that contribute to the various sea level rise scenarios (Figure by Jamie Carter, NOAA). A NASA Interagency Sea Level Rise Scenario Tool provides up-to-date sea level rise scenarios for tide gauge locations in all U.S. States, including Hawaii, out to the year 2050 based on data from the NOAA-led interagency sea level rise report (Sweet et al., 2022). https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 4/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM Exposure State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacIOOS Sea Level Rise Exposure Area (SLR-XA) Data source: Tetra Tech, Inc. combining hazard exposure data layers from the University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group Modeling, using the best available data and methods, was conducted to determine the potential future exposure of each island to multiple coastal hazards as a result of sea level rise. Three chronic flooding hazards were modeled: a. passive flooding, b. annual high wave flooding, and c. coastal erosion (see descriptions of individual hazard layers, below). The footprint of these three hazards were combined to define the projected extent of chronic flooding due to sea level rise, called the sea level rise exposure area (SLR-XA, Figure 3). Flooding in the SLR-XA is associated with long-term, chronic hazards punctuated by annual or more frequent flooding events. Each of these hazards were modeled for four future sea level rise scenarios: 0.5 foot, 1.1 foot, 2.0 feet and 3.2 feet based on the upper end of the IPCC AR5 RCP8.5 GMSL rise scenario. ocean Figure 3. Schematic diagram of the SLR-XA as the combined exposure to sea level rise from passive flooding, annual high wave flooding, and coastal erosion. Assumptions and Limitations: The assumptions and limitations described below for the three chronic flooding hazards apply to the SLR-XA. Not all hazards were modeled for each island due to limited historical information and geospatial data. The SLR-XA for the islands of Hawaii, Moloka'i, and Lana'i is based on modeling passive flooding only. Additional studies would be needed to add the annual high wave flooding and coastal erosion to the SLR-XA for those islands. The SLR-XA is an overlay of three hazards and does not account for interactive nature of these hazards as would be expected by natural processes. As with the individual exposure models, the SLR-XA maps hazard exposure on the present landscape. The modeling does not account for future (unknown) land use changes, including any adaptation measures. The SLR-XA also does not include impacts from less frequent high wave events (e.g., a 1-in-10 year event), storm surge, or tsunami. In addition, mapping errors may be found in some areas due to clipping (subletting) of the original map layers using a shoreline (Special Management Area) boundary and possible modeling errors in the Annual High Wave Flooding model at reef and harbor channels (Figure 4). See descriptions of the individual Sea Level Rise Exposure models below for more information. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 5/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S } O'ahu Mk*. M� 1/ Y r�9 Area already submerged. Due to clippingwith a "shoreline"boundary BASEMILPS 0SeaL IRse Es eA-0 W MI( b,,.,kIft � A�AxQ o-..P er�oodln9 YJ Kok ko a 0: A 1-O Wave F-6r,o O 1 ALA Mo Modelingerrorr Area alreadysubmerged due to presence of lharbor).Due toclipping reef and harbor with a "shoreline" boundary channel ---' dh VULNERABILITY nppcential emnom�c ross0 O Flooded MighwaysU I DTNEB OVERLAYS expantl •collapse clear • h[de Pad 0S r, rneuesecsa,e cmoer rnmsduu , kaPM a moo erru Figure 4. Mapping errors may exist in some areas due to clipping (subletting) at the shoreline and errors from the Annual High Wave Flooding model at reef and harbor channels (example from Kaka'ako, O'ahu). Data access: Shapefile 2, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Exposure Area - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: "26"), WFS, metadata Sea level rise: 3.2 ft ® SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Tetra Tech, Inc. and University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group. 2017. Sea Level Rise - Exposure Area. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. ® RELATED PUBLICATIONS: Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report; Anderson et al. 2018. T Back to Top a. Passive Flooding ri Data source: University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group. Adapted for display and vulnerability assessment by Tetra Tech, Inc. Passive flooding was modeled by the Coastal Geology Group at UH SOEST using a modified "bathtub" approach following methods described in Anderson et al. 2018. The passive flooding model provides an initial assessment of low-lying areas susceptible to flooding by sea level rise. Passive flooding includes areas that are hydrologically connected to the ocean (marine flooding) and low-lying areas that are not hydrologically connected to the ocean (groundwater). Data used in modeling passive flooding include the GMSL rise projections discussed above in Sea Level Rise Projections for Modeling, digital elevation models (DEM), and the mean higher high water (MHHW) datum from local tide gauges. DEMs used in this study are freely available from NOAA and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). DEMs are derived from aerial light detection and ranging (LiDAR) data. The horizontal and vertical positional accuracies of the DEMs conform to flood hazard mapping standards of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA 2012). The IPCC AR5 RCP8.5 sea level rise scenario was used in modeling exposure to passive flooding from sea level rise at 0.5, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.2 feet. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 6/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S sea -level, water table, and feshwater-saline water interface future current groundwater sea- marine inundation level inundation water table rise rise freshwater volcanic rock caprock freshwater -saline water interface rise saltwater Figure 5. Schematic diagram showing passive marine and groundwater flooding from current sea level (blue) to future sea level (red) (adapted from Rotzoll and Fletcher 2012). Passive flooding was modeled using the DEMs in geographic information systems software to identify areas below a certain sea level height (flooded by sea level rise) when raising water levels above current Mean Higher High Water (MHHW) tidal datum. In other words, water levels are shown as they would appear during MHHW, or the average higher high water height of each tidal day. The area flooded was derived by subtracting a tidal surface model from the DEM. Assumptions and Limitations: In many areas around the State, representing sea level rise from passive marine flooding will likely produce an underestimate of the area inundated or permanently submerged because the model does not account for waves and coastal erosion, important processes along Hawaii's highly dynamic coasts. For this reason, coastal erosion and annual high wave flooding are also modeled to provide a more comprehensive picture of the extent of hazard exposure with sea level rise. The passive flooding model does not explicitly include flooding through storm drain systems and other underground infrastructure, which would contribute to flooding in many low-lying areas identified in the model. The DEMs used in the modeling depict a smoothed topographic surface and do not identify basements, parking garages, and other development below ground that would be affected by marine and groundwater flooding with sea level rise. More detailed hydrologic and engineering modeling may be necessary to fully assess passive marine flooding hazards at the scale of individual properties. Mapping errors may be found in some areas due to clipping (subletting) of the original map layers using a shoreline (Special Management Area) boundary (see Figure 4, above). Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Passive Flooding - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: "22"), WFS, metadata L Sea level rise: 3.2 ft ® SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group and Tetra Tech, Inc. 2017. Sea Level Rise - Passive Flooding. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. ® RELATED PUBLICATIONS: Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report; Anderson et al. 2018. T Back to Top b. Annual High wave Flooding Data source: University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group. Adapted for display and vulnerability assessment by Tetra Tech, Inc. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 7/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacIOOS Hawaii is exposed to large waves annually on all open coasts due to our location in the Central North Pacific Ocean. The distance over which waves run-up and wash across the shoreline will increase with sea level rise. As water levels increase, less wave energy will be dissipated through breaking on nearshore reefs and waves will arrive at a higher elevation at the shoreline. Computer model simulations of future annual high wave flooding were conducted by the Coastal Geology Group at UH SOEST using methods described in Anderson et al. 2018. The model propagates the maximum annually recurring wave, calculated from offshore wave buoy data, over the reef and to the shore along one-dimensional (1 D) cross -shore profiles extracted from a 1-meter DEM. Profiles are spaced 20 meters apart along the coast. This approach was used to model the transformation of the wave as it breaks across the reef and includes shallow water wave processes such as wave set-up and overtopping. The RCP8.5 scenario was used to model exposure to sea level rise of 0.5, 1.1, 2.0, and 3.2 feet. maximum annual significant wave --——— — — — — —— _._.= --- * - mean high high water + sea level rise — �-- mean high high water t setup I run-up horizontal inundation digital elevation model 1-meter resolution Figure 6. Schematic diagram showing key inputs and outputs of modeling annual high wave flooding. Historical data used to model annual high wave flooding include hourly measurements of significant wave height, peak wave period, and peak wave direction, and was acquired from offshore wave buoy data from PaclOOS. Maximum surface elevation and depth of the annual high wave flooding is calculated from the mean of the five highest modeled water elevations at each model location along each profile. Output from the simulations is interpolated between transects and compiled in a 5-meter map grid. Depth grid cells with values less than 10 centimeters are not included in the impact assessment. This was done to remove very thin layers of water excursions that (1) are beyond the accuracy of the model and (2) might not constitute a significant impact to land and resources when only occurring once annually. Any low-lying flooded areas that are not connected to the ocean are also removed. Assumptions and Limitations: Annual high wave flood modeling covered wave -exposed coasts with low-lying development on Maui, Oahu, and Kaua'i. Annual high wave flooding was not available for the islands of Hawaii, Molokai, and Lanai, nor for some harbors or other back -bay areas throughout all the islands. Additional studies would be needed to add the annual high wave flooding for those areas. The maximum annually recurring wave parameters (significant wave height, period, direction) were statistically determined using historical wave climate records and do not include potential changes in future wave climate, the effects of storm surge, or less -frequent high wave events (e.g., a 1-in-10 year wave event). In some locations, the extent of flooding modeled was limited by the extent of the 1-meter DEM. Changes in shoreline location due to coastal erosion are not included in this modeling. As shorelines retreat, annual high wave flooding will reach farther inland along retreating shorelines. Waves are propagated along a "bare earth" DEM which is void of shoreline structures, buildings, and vegetation, and waves are assumed to flow over an impermeable surface. The DEM represents a land surface at one particular time, and may not be representative of the beach shape during the season of most severe wave impact, particularly for highly variable north and west -exposed beaches. Undesirable artifacts of 1 D modeling include over -predicted flooding along some transects with deep, shore -perpendicular indentations in the sea bottom such as nearshore reef channels (see Figure 4, above). The 1 D modeling does not account for the presence of nearby shallow reef which refracts and dissipates some of the wave energy traveling through the channel toward the shore. Wave flooding modeling may be improved in future efforts by employing more complex and data -intensive 2D modeling and through local field experiments. In addition, mapping errors may be found in some areas due to clipping (subletting) of the original map layers using a shoreline (Special Management Area) boundary (see Figure 4, above). —4 Data access: Shapefile 2, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Annual High Wave Flooding - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: 18"), WFS, metadata Sea level rise: 3.2 ft https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 8/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S ® SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group and Tetra Tech, Inc. 2017. Sea Level Rise -Annual Nigh Wave Flooding. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. ® RELATED PUBLICATIONS: Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report; Anderson et al. 2018. T Back to Top Data source: University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group 2020 Data Update: The coastal exposure map data in the Viewer were updated in 2020 by the University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group. Details on that update are provided below, following Assumptions and Limitations. Studies of historical shoreline change using aerial photographs and survey maps show that 70% of beaches on Kaua'i, Oahu, and Maui are eroding (receding landward) (Fletcher et al. 2012). Beaches exist in a delicate balance between existing water levels, wave energy, and sand supply. Coastal erosion modeling was conducted for sandy shorelines of Kauai, O'ahu, and Maui by the Coastal Geology Group at UH SOEST. The methods are described in Anderson et al. 2018 and combine historical shoreline change data with a model of beach profile response to sea level rise in order to estimate probabilities of future exposure to erosion at transects (shore -perpendicular measurement locations) spaced approximately 20 meters apart along the shoreline. The model accounts for localized alongshore variability in shoreline change by incorporating trends from the historical erosion mapping studies. The modeling is shown schematically in the following figure. a) shoreline retreat i elevated sea level — ---------- — — — — — — — — — — — —— --/ --——————————————— — — — — ——----- f------- initial sea level i profile after sea level rise �_ initial profile) b) elevated sea level --— — —— y — initial sea level Figure 7. Schematic diagram showing key inputs and outputs of modeling coastal erosion (top) and the change in shoreline profiles with sea level rise (bottom). Historical data used to model coastal erosion consisted of: (1) historical shoreline positions and erosion rates measured from high -resolution (0.5 meters) ortho-rectified aerial photographs and NOAA topographic charts dating back to the early 1900s (Fletcher et al. 2012, Romine et al. 2013), https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 9/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S and (2) beach profile field survey data (Gibbs et al. 2001, Fletcher et al. 2012). The vegetation line was identified in the most recent aerial photography dating from 2006 to 2008. The output of the modeling is the estimated exposure zone to future erosion hazards. Based on the model and IPCC RCP8.5 sea level rise scenario, there is an 80% probability that land impacted by erosion would be confined within the exposure zone at that particular time. The exposure zones extend landward from the current -day shoreline (vegetation line) up to the 80% cumulative probability contour for each of the four sea level rise scenarios, which incorporates the uncertainty (upper and lower bounds) of the IPCC RCP8.5 sea level rise projection. Assumptions and Limitations: Historical shoreline change data and beach profiles needed to model coastal erosion are available only for sandy shores of Kauai, Oahu, and Maui. Exposure was not modeled for less -erodible rocky coasts and bluffs, though the latter can be prone to sudden failure in some areas. In addition, modeling did not account for: • Existing seawalls or other coastal armoring in the backshore*; • Increasing wave energy across the fringing reef with sea level rise; • Possible changes in reef accretion and nearshore sediment processes with sea level rise; and • Possible changes to sediment supply from future shoreline development and engineering, such as construction or removal of coastal armoring or other coastal engineering. *Where a beach was lost to erosion fronting coastal armoring, historical shoreline change rates used in the coastal erosion model were calculated using historical shoreline positions up to and including the first shoreline indicating no beach. 2023 Data Update: Prior versions of the erosion hazard polylines were transformed (reprojected) incorrectly into the NAD83 (HARN) datum. This represents a minor, sub -version release: no modeling was performed to provide or change future hazard zone or line positions or extents. Please see the layer metadata for more information. 2020 Data Update: The coastal erosion exposure map data in the Viewer were updated in 2020 by the University of Hawai'i Coastal Geology Group following the methods described above for the 2017 Report and in Anderson et al. 2018. For the update, historical shoreline change rates were recalculated for Kauai, Oahu, and Maui with the addition of a new historical shoreline position (ca. 2014-2018, depending on location) to the database of previously existing historical shoreline positions. The erosion models were then recalculated using the updated historical change rates following the methods described above. The combined SLR-XA from the 2017 Report was not updated with the updated 2020 erosion models. As a result, users may notice some mismatch between the coastal erosion projections and the SLR-XA in areas where the landward extent of the SLR-XA is defined by the coastal erosion hazard line. The addition of the new shoreline generally has a more pronounced influence on study areas with high seasonal or inter -annual variability in shoreline position. The coastal erosion exposure model is depicted as lines in the Viewer. The data are also available for download as polygons (exposure areas) below. In addition to changes in the landward extent of the erosion exposure areas, the seaward edge of updated erosion exposure polygons does not match up with the SLR-XA or the previous (2017) erosion exposure polygons. This is because the seaward edge of the 2017 data is defined by a Special Management Area shoreline boundary, whereas the seaward edge of the updated 2020 data is defined by the location of a vegetation line. Data access: polylines: Shapefile E?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Coastal Erosion (Line) - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: "14"), WFS, metadata —4 Data access: polygons: Shapefile 2, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Coastal Erosion - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: 10"), WFS, metadata Sea level rise: 3.2 ft Vegetation line: Shapefile (2, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR - Vegetation Line (2005-2008)"), WMS (layer: "30"), WFS, metadata IAL SUGGESTED DATA CITATIONS: University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group. 2020, updated 2023. Sea Level Rise - Coastal Erosion. Version 2.1. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]; University of Hawaii Coastal Geology Group. 2017. Sea Level Rise -Vegetation Line. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. ® RELATED PUBLICATIONS: Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report; Anderson et al. 2018. T Back to Top https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 10/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S Vulnerability Potential Economic Loss Data source: Tetra Tech. Inc. Vulnerability was assessed for the main Hawaiian Islands using the outputs of the coastal hazard exposure modeling. Potential economic loss was based on the value of the land and structures from the county tax parcel database permanently lost in the SLR-XA for each projected sea level rise height. Potential economic loss was analyzed individually for each hazard (passive flooding, annual high wave flooding, or coastal erosion) at the parcel level and subsequently aggregated in 1-hectare (100 square meter or 1,076 square foot) grids. For the islands of Hawai'i, Lanai, and Molokai, the potential economic loss was based solely on passive flooding. Potential economic loss in the SLR-XA area was determined from the highest loss value of any one hazard within the 1-hectare grid, thus avoiding double counting a loss of a particular asset from multiple hazards. Those maximum values for each sector are then summed to determine the total economic loss to property in each grid. Assumptions and Limitations: The vulnerability assessment addressed exposure to chronic flooding with sea level rise. Key assumptions of the economic analysis for the SLR-XA included: (a) loss is permanent; (b) economic loss is based on the value in U.S. dollars in 2016 as property values in the future are unknown; (c) economic loss is based on the value of the land and structures exposed to flooding in the SLR-XA excluding the contents of the property and does not include the economic loss or cost to replace roads, water conveyance systems and other critical infrastructure; and (d) no adaptation measures are put in place that could reduce impacts in the SLR-XA. Economic value data were not available for length of roads, water and wastewater lines, and other public infrastructure due to the variable cost of such infrastructure depending on location, and the complexity and uncertainty involved in design, siting, and construction. Additionally, environmental assets such as beaches and wetlands were not assessed economically due to the complexity in valuing ecosystem services. The loss of both public infrastructure and environmental assets from flooding would result in significant economic loss. Therefore, the total potential economic loss figures estimated in the Report and Viewer are likely an underestimate. Data access: Shapefile 2, ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Potential Economic Loss - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: "6"), WFS, metadata Sea level rise: 3.2 ft ® SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Tetra Tech, Inc. 2017. Sea Level Rise - Potential Economic Loss. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis- data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. IAL RELATED PUBLICATION: Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report. T Back to Top Flooded Highways Data source: Tetra Tech, Inc. Potential impacts to roads were assessed in terms of exposure to chronic flooding in the SLR-XA, but were not monetized. The SLR-XA is overlaid with these assets to determine locations impacted by chronic flooding with sea level rise. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 11 /18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S —4 Data access: Shapefile 2', ArcGIS REST (layer: "SLR Potential Flooded Highways - 3.2 Ft. Scenario"), WMS (layer: "2"), WFS, metadata L,!!! Sea level rise: 3.2 ft nL SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Tetra Tech, Inc. 2017. Sea Level Rise - Flooded Highways. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data- expanded/. Accessed [date]. nL RELATED PUBLICATION: Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report. T Back to Top Other Overlays Data source: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Passive flooding with 6 feet of sea level rise from the NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer is provided to support assessment of sea level rise hazards, particularly for critical infrastructure and for other development with low tolerance for risk. Areas that are hydrologically connected to the ocean are shown in shades of blue (darker blue = greater depth). Low-lying areas, displayed in green, are hydrologically "unconnected" areas that may also flood. The methods, assumptions, and limitations are essentially the same as those described above in Passive Flooding. A sea level rise projection of 6 feet above a local mean higher high water (MHHW) datum is used in modeling. In many areas around the State, representing sea level rise from passive marine flooding will likely produce an underestimate of the area inundated or permanently submerged because the model does not account for waves and coastal erosion, important processes along HawaiTs highly dynamic coasts. Please see the NOAA Sea Level Rise Viewer for more detailed information. Data access: File Geodatabases 2, ArcGIS REST, WMTS n SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: NOAA Office for Coastal Management. Sea Level Rise Viewer. https://coast.noaa.gov/sir/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Community Plan Areas Data source: Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Community planning district boundaries for the islands of Kaua'i, Oahu, Maui, Moloka'i, Lana'i, Kaho'olawe, and Hawaii Island are provided by the State of Hawaii Office of Planning. Community plans are required by the county charters and adopted by ordinance through the county councils and must be updated at regular intervals. The plans, developed through the planning departments of each county, are intended to provide vision, guidelines, and implementing policies for each area. Community plans can provide an important existing framework for addressing sea level rise https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 12/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I Pad00S vulnerability because the plans provide recommendations concerning land use, density and design, transportation, community facilities, infrastructure, visitor accommodations, commercial and residential areas and other matters related to development that are specific to the region of the plan. Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "Development Plan Areas"), WMS (layer: "14"), WFS, metadata IAL SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Hawai'i Statewide GIS Program. Development Plans. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data- expanded/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Moku Boundaries Data source: Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Historic land divisions. Each island, or mokupuni, is divided into large districts, or moku. These are then further divided into ahupua'a (see below). Created by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Although not survey grade, and not checked for legal validity, the boundaries correspond to 19th-century survey maps. The orthography of each name was researched, including spelling and diacritical marks. Traditional moku boundaries extended into the ocean. However, this seaward extension is not depicted by this layer. Data access: Shapefile E?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "Moku"), WMS (layer: "2"), WFS, metadata IAL SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Hawai'i Statewide GIS Program. Moku Boundaries (Historic Land Divisions). https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Ahupua'a Boundaries Data source: Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Historic land divisions. Each island, or mokupuni, is divided into large districts, or moku (see above). These are then further divided into ahupua'a, usually extending from the uplands to the sea. Created by the Office of Hawaiian Affairs. Although not survey grade, and not checked for legal validity, the boundaries correspond to 19th-century survey maps. The orthography of each name was researched, including spelling and diacritical marks. Traditional ahupua'a boundaries extended into the ocean. However, this seaward extension is not depicted by this layer. Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "Ahupuaa"), WMS (layer: 1"), WFS, metadata R SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Office of Hawaiian Affairs and Hawai'i Statewide GIS Program. Ahupuaa Boundaries (Historic Land Divisions). https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 13/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM T Back to Top State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacIOOS Flood Hazard Zones Data source: Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Flood hazard zones for the State of Hawai'i are established by the U.S. Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) through the Flood Insurance Rate Maps (DFIRM). Areas that fall within the 100-year flood boundary (a.k.a. base flood or floodplain) are called Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) and are divided into insurance risk zones A, AE, AH, AO, or VE. The term 100-year flood indicates that the area has a 1 % chance of flooding in any given year. Zones XS00 and X Levee are Non -Special Flood Hazard Areas (NSFHA) and have moderate -to -low flood risk. The FIRMS are used by the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) for floodplain management, mitigation, and insurance purposes. The FIRMS are based on hydraulic modeling of present day flood risk and do not include future increases in flood hazards with sea level rise. See also: State of Hawaii, Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR), Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT). Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "State DFIRM"), WMS (layer: "2"), WFS, metadata R SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Federal Emergency Management Agency and Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. Flood Hazard Zones. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Coastal Flood Hazard Zone with Sea Level Rise Data source: Tetra Tech, Inc. and Sobis, Inc. The State of Hawai'i 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan (HMP) incorporated the results of modeling and an assessment of vulnerability to coastal flooding from storm -induced wave events with sea level rise (Tetra Tech Inc., 2018). The 1 %-annual-chance coastal flood zone with 3.2 feet of sea level rise (1 %CFZ-3.2) was modeled to estimate coastal flood extents for wave -generating events including tropical storms, hurricanes, tsunamis, and other severe wave events with sea level rise. Modeling was conducted by Sobis, Inc. under State of Hawai'i Department of Land and Natural Resources (DLNR) Contract No. 64064. The 1 IhCFZ-3.2 was utilized in the HMP to assess vulnerabilityto coastal event -based flooding in mid -to -late century. The 1 %CFZ-3.2 depicts estimates of future coastal flood zones for comparison to present-day National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) flood insurance rate maps (FIRMS) Special Flood Hazard Areas (SFHA) coastal'V" and "A" Flood Zones, which do not include sea level rise. This modeling can highlight areas of greater risk of being damaged by storm surge and inform land use planning and the development of hazard mitigation projects to address event -based coastal flooding that would have less frequent but more extensive flooding impacts than depicted by the SLR-XA. A simplified version of the Wave Height Analysis for Flood Insurance Studies (WHAFIS) extension included in FEMA Hazus-MH system software, was used to create the 1 %-annual-chance coastal floodplain. Hazus is a nationally applicable standardized methodology that contains models for estimating potential losses from earthquakes, floods, tsunamis, and hurricanes. A schematic of key inputs and outputs of modeling the 1 %CFZ-3.2 is shown in Figure 8. https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 14/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacI00S 1%-annual-chance ON wave run-up -- setup 1% still water elevation + sea level rise horizontal inundation - 1% still water elevation Mean Surface Water Elevation digital elevation model / 3-meter resolution Figure S. Schematic diagram showing key inputs and outputs of modeling the 1 %-annual-chance coastal flood zone. Assumptions and Limitations: Historical records of severe wave events used to model the 1%CFZ-3.2 do not consider potential changes in tropical cyclone or wave activity related to climate change. Also, riverine (rainfall) flooding is not included in the modeling. Historical data used to model the 1 %CFZ-3.2 were based on the current Flood Insurance Study (FIS) for each island conducted by the FEMA NFIP. The FISs use historic severe wave events from hurricanes, tsunamis, and other significant events to develop the FIRMS. The 1 %CFZ-3.2 is modeled as a static rise of the base flood elevation using a fixed shoreline. As such, it does not consider potential changes in the location of the shoreline resulting from coastal erosion or chronic flooding as depicted in the SLR-XA. Data access: Shapefile E?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "1% Coastal Flood Zone with 3.2 ft Sea Level Rise"), WMS (layer: "14"), WFS, metadata nL SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Tetra Tech, Inc. and Sobis, Inc. 2020. Coastal Flood Zones with Sea Level Rise of3.2 Feet. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. IAL RELATED PUBLICATION: State of Hawai'i 2018 Hazard Mitigation Plan. T Back to Top Beaches and Sand (USDA) Data source: U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) and Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program The beaches and sand map layer serves as a useful guide to understanding the physical setting of coastal areas around the State and how these areas may be affected by increased flooding and erosion with sea level rise. This layer is adapted from the Gridded USDA-NRCS Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) database. For the purposes of the Viewer, we have highlighted beaches and sand, including dunes and other areas with sandy substrates. These areas may be more susceptible to coastal erosion. However, it should be noted that beach environments may be sustained if they are allowed to migrate landward and erode into upland deposits of beach and dune sand, releasing this sediment into the littoral system. The Beaches and Sand layer identifies surficial deposits only. It should be used as an initial screening tool and may require verification at the site level. Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "Soils (Areas) - NRCS"), WMS (layer: "4"), WFS, metadata https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 15/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PaclOOS ® SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Natural Resources Conservation Service. 2016. Gridded Soil Survey Geographic (gSSURGO) Database. https://geoportal.hawaii.gov/datasets/soils-mu-state-of-hawaii. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Geology (USGS) Data source: U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Map of the State of Hawai'i (Sherrod, et al. 2007) The geology map layer serves as a useful guide to understanding the physical setting of coastal areas around the State and how these areas may be affected by increased flooding and erosion with sea level rise. For the purposes of the Viewer, we have categorized the geology into beach and dune deposits, marine and lagoon deposits, alluvium deposits, and volcanic deposits. Volcanic and marine limestone deposits may be more resistant to coastal erosion. In contrast, deposits of sand and alluvium may be more susceptible to coastal erosion. However, it should be noted that beach environments may be sustained if they are allowed to migrate landward and erode into upland deposits of beach and dune sand, releasing this sediment into the littoral system. The Geology layer identifies surficial deposits only. It should be used as an initial screening tool and may require verification at the site level. —4 Data access: Shapefile 2, GeoJSON, WMS-C (layer: "hi_usgs_all—geology"), WMS, WFS, KML, metadata R SUGGESTED CITATION: Sherrod, David R., Sinton, John M., Watkins, Sarah E., and Brunt, Kelly M. 2007. Geologic map of the State ofHawai'i.• U.S. Geological Survey Open -File Report2007-1089. http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2007/1089/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top State Land Use Districts Data source: Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Pursuant to Hawai'i Revised Statutes §205, all lands in the State of Hawai'i are classified and placed into four land use districts: Urban, Rural, Agricultural, and Conservation. This land use district map layer serves as a useful guide in determining potential impacts of sea level rise to the various land use classifications within a community. The boundaries depicted here are not official and for presentation purposes only. A determination of the official State Land Use District Boundaries should be obtained directly through the State Land Use Commission (LUC). Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "State Land Use Districts"), WMS (layer: "22"), WFS, metadata in SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: State of Hawaii Land Use Commission and Hawaii Statewide GIS Program. State Land Use Districts. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 16/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM TMK parcels State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PacIOOS Data source: Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program Tax Map Key (TMK) parcel boundaries for the State of Hawaii. Misalignment between the TMK parcel boundaries and basemap layers may be visible in some areas. Parcel boundaries from the Hawai'i Office of Planning Statewide GIS Data Program were not derived from metes and bounds and are not survey grade data. Users may utilize the satellite imagery basemap along with the TMK parcels to determine if a property is exposed to sea rise hazards. All property lots in Hawaii are defined by a 9-digit TMK number using the following format, without any special characters (e.g., 392118043): C-Z-S-PPP-PPP • C= county number (1 digit) • Z= zone number (1 digit) • S= section number (1 digit) • PPP= plat number (3 digits) • ppp= parcel number (3 digits) County numbers include the following: • 1 = City and County of Honolulu • 2 = Maui County • 3 = Hawai'i County • 4 = Kaua'i County Data access: Shapefile C?, ArcGIS REST (layer: "Statewide TMKs"), WMS (layer: 1 "), WFS, metadata IAL SUGGESTED DATA CITATION: Hawai'i Statewide GIS Program. TMK Parcels. https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis/download-gis-data-expanded/. Accessed [date]. T Back to Top Publication Date: December 22, 2017 Last Updated: June 27, 2023 Version: 1.11 Update History: show T Back to Top Join Our Monthly Newsletter https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 17/18 8/2/23, 10:28 AM State of Hawai'i Sea Level Rise Viewer I PaclOOS Waves Wave Observations Wave Forecast Currents Surface Currents Observations Surface Currents Buoy Observations Currents Forecast Swim Currents Forecast u fl Shoreline Impacts Wave Run -Up Forecast Six -Day High Sea Level Forecast Harbor Surge Forecast Sea Level Rise Water Characteristics Nearshore Sensor Observations Water Temperature Buoy Observations Water Quality Buoy Observations Salinity Forecast Water Temperature Forecast Turbidity Plume Forecast Weather Weather Observations Doppler Clouds Air Temperature Forecast Wind Forecast Rain Forecast Projects Hawaii Tiger Shark Tracking Estimated Coral Cover in Hawaii Ocean Acidification Ocean Tipping Points: Hawaii Case Study American Samoa Coral Reef Drivers Coral Reef Resilience in Guam and American Samoa Hawaiian Ko'a (Coral) Card Habitat Blueprint: West Hawai'i Focus Area Mdmala Bay Water Quality Study Hawaii Radioactivity after Fukushima Liquid Rohotics: Wave Gliders About PaclOOS U.S. IOOS News Documents Partners Acknowledgments Our Team Donate zoos PadOOS Integrated Ocean Observing System PACIFIC ISLANDS OCEAN OBSERVING SYSTEM Please contact PacIOOS if you are intending to utilize PaclOOS data in any publications. PacIOOS should be acknowledged as follows: Data provided by PaclOOS (www.pacioos.org), which is apart of the U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS®), funded in part by National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Awards 4NA1 6NOS01 20024 and 4NA21 NOS0120091. © 2023 PaclOOS https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/sir-hawaii/ 18/18 Jackson, Maija From: William Bow <WBow@bowengineering.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 9, 2023 11:04 AM To: Jackson, Maija; Komata, James; Korey Johnson; Emi Tanitomi Cc: Ochi, Jeffrey; Messina, Maurice; Camero, Tracie-Lee Subject: RE: External: RE: Milolii Park SMA and Shoreline Setback Variance Good morning everyone, We are generally okay with all the conditions, but it is up to Parks to make the final decision. Most of the conditions seem pretty typical. Regarding Condition #5, I don't think a larger IWS is a good idea (bigger isn't always better). I do understand this gives flexibility as to the size and potential disturbance of the improvement to the existing IWS, so there is a range to either just increase pumping or to build our something that improves the site. At this point, it sounds like Parks is leaning toward a holding tank for the toilet waste and continued use of the IWS for the sink water. The goal of the Condition #5 (as we see it) is to improve the beach water quality by decreasing bacterial input If there is enough flexibility in this verbiage to account for a holding tank with continued use of the IWS, then it should be fine. If re -wording is required, then please adjust. Emi is reviewing the other items to make sure it is consistent with the design and any details are incorporated into the notes and specs. Thanks, William F. Bow, M.S. Vice President Environmental Director / Chemist Bow Engineering & Development, Inc. 1953 S. Beretania Street, PH -A Honolulu, HI 96826 Office: 808-941-8853 x117 Direct: 808-369-8217 Cell: 808-371-0676 www.bowengineering.com This message is intended solely for the recipient identified above and should not be opened, read, or utilized by any other party. This message is intended above and shall not be construed as official project information or direction except as expressly provided in the contract documents. From: Jackson, Maija <Maija.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 6:03 PM To: Komata, James<James.Komata @hawaiicounty.gov>; Korey Johnson <kjohnson@bowengineering.com>; William Bow <WBow@bowengineering.com>; Emi Tanitomi <etanitomi@bowengineering.com> Cc: Ochi, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Ochi@hawaiicounty.gov>; Messina, Maurice <Maurice.Messina@hawaiicounty.gov>; Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie-Lee.Camero@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: External: RE: Milolii Park SMA and Shoreline Setback Variance Aloha all, i The "upgrading the IWS to a larger system" came from Planning in order to leave the option open for an upgrade in the future should it be needed. We were not aware of the commitments made at the July 15, 2023, meeting. Feel free to modify the language in Condition 5 to better capture the commitments made related to handling wastewater for the project. Thank you, Maija From: Komata, James <James.Komata @hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 4:48 PM To: kiohnson@bowengineering.com; William Bow <WBow@bowengineering.com>; Emi Tanitomi <etanitomi@bowengineering.com> Cc: Ochi, Jeffrey<Jeffrey.Ochi@hawaiicounty.gov>; Messina, Maurice <Maurice.Messina @hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: RE: Milolii Park SMA and Shoreline Setback Variance Importance: High Will/Emi/Korey — My review of the draft conditions results in only one issue of concern. Let me know how you read this. (Jeff — please opine as well) SMA condition #5 does not reflect the updated version of the document and the commitments made by DPR to the Miloli'i Community at our July 15, 2023 meeting wherein we proposed the modified, separated wastewater holding tank for al WC waste and continued use of the IWS for all other sources of waste water. This is integral in keeping our commitment to the community and ensuring we don't adversely affect nearshore water quality via the IWS when the park reopens. I'm not sure where the "upgrading the [IWS] to a larger system" comes from, but that's not our intent and that's not necessary per your study (as much as my memory recall functions, anyway). Please confirm and respond to Planning with appropriate revised language. Also, ensure all conditions (SSV #s 6 & 7, SMA #s 5, 7, 8, 12, 15, 16, 17, & 18; at minimum) requiring project construction commitments by the contractor are incorporated into the construction plans via construction notes and detailed as necessary. Call us if any concerns. Thanks James M. Komata, Park Planner Department of Parks and Recreation — County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street; Suite 6 — Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Work 808.961.8311— Direct_808.961.8531 — Fax_808.961.8411 James. Komata@ hawaiicounty.gov Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may contain confidential information. Any review, use, disclosure, or distribution by unintended recipients is prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy all copies of the original message. From: Jackson, Maija<Maiia.Jackson@hawaiicounty.gov> Sent: Tuesday, August 8, 2023 11:05 AM To: kiohnson@bowengineering.com; Ochi, Jeffrey <Jeffrey.Ochi@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Komata, James<James.Komata@hawaiicounty.gov>; Camero, Tracie-Lee <Tracie-Lee.Cam ero@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Milolii Park SMA and Shoreline Setback Variance Importance: High Aloha Korey and Jeff, We are working on finalizing the background and recommendation reports for the Milolii Park SSV and SMA applications. Please review the draft conditions below and let me know if you have any concerns or questions. We would appreciate your review as soon as possible and no later than 4:00 p.m. Wednesday. I apologize for the short turn around. Maija Jackson, Planning Program Manager Leeward and Windward Planning Commissions and Special Management Area (SMA)/Shoreline Permitting 808-961-8159 Shoreline Setback Variance Draft Conditions 1) The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) ("Applicant") shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. 2) The overall development shall conform substantially to the plans submitted and the representations made by the Applicant and as described in the multi -permit application dated February 27, 2023, any supplemental information, and any representations made to the Leeward Planning Commission. 3) The applicant shall comply with all conditions of SMA Use Permit # PL-SMA-2023-000031. 4) The applicant shall secure all necessary approvals and permits from other affected Federal, State, and County agencies as necessary to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. 5) Except as approved with this variance, no land alteration, grubbing, landscaping or construction activities, including but not limited to, the stockpiling of debris, construction materials or equipment, shall occur in the shoreline setback area without securing a prior written determination of minor structure or activity pursuant to Planning Department Rule 11-8 from the Planning Director or amendment of this shoreline setback variance from the Planning Commission. 6) During construction, measures shall be taken to minimize the potential of both fugitive dust and runoff sedimentation. Such measures shall be in compliance with construction industry standards and practices utilized during construction projects of the State of Hawaii. Prior to the commencement of any land altering or construction activities, erosion control barrier (silt containment devices) shall be installed along the certified shoreline in areas where there are no rock walls in the area of the western property boundary to minimize potential run off or sedimentation and shall remain in place until construction has been completed and final inspection has been granted by the Department of Public Works for the Miloli `i Beach Park Improvements. 7) The erosion control barrier (silt containment devices) must be shown and properly noted on the plans submitted with any permits required for any land altering or construction activities. The construction notes on the plans must include the following statement, "The erosion control barrier (silt containment devices) must be erected prior to any land altering or construction activities and must remain in place until final inspection has been granted by Department of Public Works." 3 8) Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate procedures to revoke this variance. SMA Use Permit Draft Conditions 1) The applicant(s), its successor(s), or assign(s) ("Applicant") shall be responsible for complying with all stated conditions of approval. 2) The overall development shall conform substantially to the plans submitted and the representations made by the Applicant and as described in the multi -permit application dated January 25, 2023, any supplemental information, and any representations made to the Leeward Planning Commission. 3) The applicant shall secure all necessary approvals and permits from other affected Federal, State, and County agencies as necessary to comply with all applicable laws and regulations. 4) Construction of the proposed facility improvements shall be completed within five (5) years from the effective date of this permit. Prior to commencing construction, Final Plan Approval for the proposed development, as represented in the plans submitted with the application, shall be secured from the Planning Department. Plans shall identify existing and proposed structures, paved driveway access, lighting, parking and public access associated with the proposed use. 5) The applicant shall either upgrade the existing individual wastewater system (1WS) to a larger system meeting with the approval of the Department of Health or implement the August 2020 IWS Assessment and Feasibility Study for Miloh `i Beach Park recommendations for the routine pumping of the existing wastewater system as shown in Appendix D of the Final Environmental Assessment dated December 2022. The Applicant shall ensure that the existing wastewater system be routinely pumped once every three months and additional monthly routine pumping during high usage periods. 6) The Planning Department may require a shoreline survey certified by the Chair of the Board of Land and Natural Resources for any future construction or activity. 7) The applicant shall comply with the Mitigation Measures and Regulatory Requirements and Summary of Mitigation Measures and Project Commitments to Minimize Potential Impacts of the Project located within the Final Environmental Assessment dated December 2022. 8) Artificial light from exterior lighting fixtures, including, but not necessarily limited to floodlights, up - lights or spotlights used for decorative or aesthetic purposes shall be prohibited if the light directly illuminates, or is directed to project across property boundaries toward, the shoreline and ocean waters, except as may otherwise be permitted pursuant to Section 205A-71(b), Hawaii Revised Statutes. 9) All development shall comply with Chapter 27, Flood Control of the Hawaii County Code. 10) All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentation Control of the Hawaii County Code. 4 11) All development generated runoff shall be disposed of onsite and shall not be directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared by a professional civil engineer licensed in the State of Hawaii and submitted to the Department of Public Works prior to issuance of Final Plan Approval. Any recommended drainage improvements, if required, shall be constructed meeting with the approval of the Department of Public Works prior to receipt of a Certificate of Occupancy for any portion of the development. 12) During construction, measures shall be taken to minimize the potential of both fugitive dust and runoff sedimentation. Such measures shall be in compliance with construction industry standards and practices utilized during construction projects of the State of Hawaii. 13) The applicant shall comply with Chapter 11-55, Water Pollution Control, Hawaii Administrative Rules, Department of Health, which requires an NPDES permit for certain construction activities. 14) Should any drywells be installed, the applicant shall implement the best management practices contained in the State Office of Planning's Low Impact Development -A Practitioner's Guide, for storm water management to minimize the impact of the proposed development on the existing area's hydrology while maintain on -site infiltration and preventing polluted runoff from storm events. 15) In the 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 demolition and/or construction work, the Applicant shall cease work in the immediate vicinity of the find, protect the find from additional disturbance and contact the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) at (808) 933-7651. Subsequent work shall proceed upon an archaeological clearance from SHPD when it finds that sufficient mitigation measures have been taken. 16) The State endangered Hawaiian Monk Seal (Ilio holo i ka) could potentially occur or haul out onshore within the vicinity of the proposed project site. If this species is detected within 100 feet of the project area all nearby construction operations should cease and not continue until the monk seal has departed the area on its own accord. 17) To protect the endangered Blackburn's sphinx moth, the Applicant shall prevent infestations of tree tobacco by removing the plants under three (3) feet tall. Where removal of taller tree tobacco is necessary, the Applicant shall provide a faunal survey of the area, conducted by a qualified biologist for review and approval to the U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service prior to cutting or removal of vegetation from the property. 18) To protect any seabirds (Hawaiian petrels, Newell's shearwaters and band-rumped storm petrel) in the vicinity of the property, any lighting shall be fully shielded so that the bulb can only be seen from below bulb height. The lights shall be turned off when human activity is not occurring in the lighted area. 19) An initial extension of time for the performance of conditions within this permit may be granted by the Planning Director upon the following circumstances: 5 A. The non-performance is the result of conditions that could not have been foreseen or are beyond the control of the Applicant and that are not the result of their fault or negligence. B. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the General Plan or Zoning Code. C. Granting of the time extension would not be contrary to the original reasons for the granting of this permit. D. 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). If the Applicant should require an additional extension of time, the Planning Department shall submit the Applicant's request to the Planning Commission for appropriate action. 20) Should any of the foregoing conditions not be met or substantially complied with in a timely fashion, the Planning Director may initiate procedures to revoke the permit. DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS COUNTY OF HAWAII HILO, HAWAII DATE: June 20, 2023 790"W0449 ft TO: Planning Director FROM: Department of Public Works, Engineering Division SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Applicant: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park TM K: 8-9-004:001 Sorry for the delay. We have reviewed the subject request and provide the following comments: 1. The subject parcel is in an area designated as Flood Zone X, AE, and VE on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). • The subject parcel is in an area designated as Zone X on the Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Zone X is an area determined to be outside the 500-year floodplain. • Flood Zone AE is the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by the 100-year flood (1 % chance of occurring in any given year) with Base Flood Elevations determined. • Flood Zone VE is the Special Flood Hazard Area inundated by the 100-year coastal flood (1 % chance of occurring in any given year) with velocity hazard (wave action) with Base Flood Elevations determined. • All construction within Flood Zones AE and VE shall comply with Chapter 27, Floodplain Management, of the Hawaii County Code. 2. All earthwork and grading shall conform to Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, of the Hawaii County Code (HCC). 3. All development -generated runoff shall be disposed of on site and not directed toward any adjacent properties. A drainage study shall be prepared and the recommended drainage system shall be constructed meeting the approval of the Department of Public Works. 4. Construction within the County right-of-way shall comply with HCC, Chapter 22, County Planning Depi. County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Exhibit 6 Streets. 5. Questions may be referred to Robyn Matsumoto at 961-8924. County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAVI 345 KEKUANAO'A STREET, SUITE 20 • HILO, HAWAI'I 96720 TELEPHONE (808) 961-8050 • FAX (808) 961-8657 June 2. 2023 G01 PLANNING DFP JUN 6 2023 PH :12 TO: Mr. Zendo Kern, Director Planning Department FROM: Keith K. Okamoto, Manager -Chief Engineer SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Applicant: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park Tax Map Key (3) 8-9-004:001 We have reviewed the subject application and have no objections or comments to offer at this time, as the Department has no water system facilities in the area. Should there be any questions, please contact Mr. Ryan Quitoriano of our Water Resources and Planning Branch at (808) 961-8070, extension 256. Sincerely yours, 144"V Keith K. Okamoto, P.E. Manager -Chief Engineer RQ : dfg COPY — County of I lawai `i, Department of Parks and Recreation Bow Engineering &. Development, Inc. ... `kUater, Our_'Alost Precious Plcln�tar�g D es. 12esource ... 7�a INaiA pane .. . The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. Exhibit 7 "�V.os,M1 Ramzi I. Mansour Mitchell D. Roth��� Mayor : k Director Lee Lord Brenda Iokepa-Moses Managing Director Deputy Director u County of Hawaii DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 345 Kekuando`a Street, Suite 41 • Hilo, Hawaii 96720 • cohdem@hawaiicounty.gov Ph: (808) 961-8083 • Fax: (808) 961-8086 170 _ ►I I ► : 1 ►I I TO: Zendo Kern, Director Planning Department FROM: Ramzi I. Mansour, Direc VAC oa Department of Environmental Management DATE: June 16, 2023 SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023 -00003 1) Applicant: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park Tax Map Key: (3) 8-9-004:001; South Kona, Hawaii The Solid Waste Division has reviewed the subject application and has no comments. The Wastewater Division has reviewed the subject application and offers the following comments and/or recommendations (contact the Wastewater Division for details): • No County sewer system in area. Applicant shall follow Hawaii Department of Health, and all other applicable federal, state, and county regulations. County of Hawai'i is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer Planning Depi. Exhibit 8 HAWAII FIRE DEPARTMENT. COUNTY OF HAWAII . HILO, HAWAII 96720 DATE May 19, 2023 Memorandum TO TRACIE-LEE CAMERO, COUNTY OF HAWAII, PLANNING DEPT. FROM CAPTAIN CLINTON BAYBAYAN, FIRE PREVENTION BRANCH SUBJECT: MILOLI'I FACILITIES UPGRADES, SHORELINE SETBACK AND SMA USE PERMIT In regards to the above -mentioned project, Fire Department Access and Water Supply shall comply with Chapter 18 of the 2018 Hawaii State Fire Code and Chapter 17 of the Hawaii County Code. For any questions, please email Clinton.Baybayan(a),hawaiicounty.gov or call 808-323-4761. Respectfully Submitted, Clinton Baybayan Fire Prevention Captain Fire Prevention Branch Hawaii Fire Department Planning Dept. Exhibit 95g Coastal Zone Management Program Environmental Review Program Land Use Commission Land Use Division Special Plans Branch STATE OF HAWAH OFFICE OF PLANNING & SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT 235 South Beretania Street, 6th Floor, Honolulu, Hawaii 96813 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 2359, Honolulu, Hawaii 96804 Mr. Zendo Kern, Director Department of Planning County of Hawaii East Hawaii Office 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 June 15, 2023 JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR SYLVIA LUKE LT. GOVERNOR MARY ALICE EVANS INTERIM DIRECTOR Telephone: (808) 587-2846 Fax: (808) 587-2824 Web: https://planning.hawaii.gov/ DTS 202305160814RE State Transit -Oriented Attn: Ms. Tracie-Lee Camero Development Statewide Geographic Dear Mr. Kern: Information System Subject: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Statewide Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023- Sustainability Branch 000031) to Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park, South Kona, Hawaii; Tax Map Key: (3) 8-9-004: 001. Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031), transmitted via memorandum dated May 15, 2023, to conduct facilities upgrades and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park, South Kona, Hawaii. According to the subject applications, the proposed facilities upgrade and improvement project from the County of Hawaii Department of Parks and Recreation includes: o Replacement of the existing pavilion with proper permits to meet current ADA standards; o Replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards; o Replacement of the non -potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station; o Improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible; o Improvement of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible; o Reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence; o Construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence; designation of a boat turnaround area; and Planning Dept. Exhibit _1 0 Mr. Zendo Kern June 15, 2023 Page 2 o Installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. Besides the demolition and relocation of the restrooms, pavilion, and water storage structures, most of the proposed improvements involve minor alterations or cosmetic work to existing structures. The project would be constructed based on funding availability in one phase over approximately 6 to 8 months. The estimated construction cost for the proposed beach park improvements is $1.75 million. The Final Environmental Assessment for the proposed facilities upgrades and improvements was published in the Environmental Notice, February 8, 2023. The Office of Planning and Sustainable Development (OPSD) has reviewed the subject applications and has the following comments to offer. To assess potential impacts of sea level rise on the project area, the OPSD suggests the subject SMA Use Permit and Shoreline Setback Variance applications refer to the findings of the Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report 2017, accepted by the Hawaii Climate Change Mitigation and Adaptation Commission. The Report, and Hawaii Sea Level Rise Viewer at https://www.pacioos.hawaii.edu/shoreline/slr-hawaii/ particularly identifies a 3.2-foot sea level rise exposure area across the main Hawaiian Islands which may occur in the mid to latter half of the 215t century. The OPSD recommends that the applications provide a series of maps of 1.1-foot, 2.0-foot, and 3.2-foot sea level exposure areas in relation to the project area to visualize and assess sea level rise impacts with consideration of mitigation measures. 2. A portion of the concrete walkways to the campground and additional paving would be located within the 40-foot shoreline setback area. According to the Shoreline Setback Variance Application, the entire shoreline (area) at the site is subject to inundation due to high seas and swells caused by hurricanes and distant storms and tsunami activity. The OPSD suggests that the subject Shoreline Setback Variance Application consider site -specific mitigation measures, including an evaluation of an increase in the shoreline setbacks, to mitigate impacts of storm surges and inundation on the proposed structures within the shoreline area. If feasible, new facilities and concrete structures shall be avoided within the shoreline area as established by the county shoreline rules. 3. The OPSD concurs that that site -specific mitigation measures shall be implemented to prevent any runoff, sediment, soil and debris potentially resulting from associated Mr. Zendo Kern June 15, 2023 Page 3 construction activities, including excavation, grading and staging, from adversely impacting the coastal ecosystem and the State waters as specified in Hawaii Administrative Rules Chapter 11-54. 4. In enacting Act 224, Session Laws of Hawaii 2005, the legislature found that light pollution in Hawaii s coastal areas and artificial lighting illuminating the shoreline and ocean waters can he disruptive to avian and marine life. Pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes §§ 205A-30.5(b) and 205A-71(b), for artificial lighting provided by a government agency or its authorized users for government operations, security, public safety, or navigational needs, a government agency or its authorized users shall make reasonable efforts to properly position or shield lights to minimize any adverse impacts. 5. As stated, the County aims to provide ongoing beach park access during construction of the proposed improvements. The OPSD recommends that the applicant and construction contractor minimize potential traffic impacts generated from the proposed construction activities on the public access, including park users' parking, to Miloli`i Beach Park and coastal recreation areas. 6. Should any archaeological or cultural resources, or burials be discovered during ground excavation, all construction work shall be ceased immediately. Subsequent work shall proceed only upon an archaeological clearance from the State Historic Preservation Division, Department of Lands and Natural Resources. If you have any questions regarding this comment letter, please contact Shichao Li of our office at (808) 587-2841 or by email at shichao.li@hawaii.gov. Sincerely, Mary Alice Evans Interim Director JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR OF HAWAII KE KIA'AI NA O KA MOKU'AI NA O HAWAI'I STATE OF HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH P.O. BOX 916 HI LO, HAWAI 196721-0916 MEMORANDUM DATE: May 24, 2023 TO: Mr. Zendo Kern Planning Director, County of Hawaii FROM: Eric Honda District Environmental Health Program Chief KENNETH S. FINK, M.D, MGA, MPH DIRECTOR OF HEALTH KA LUNA HO'OKELE SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Applicant: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvement to Miloli'I Beach Park TMK: 8-9-004:001 _ South Kona_ Hawaii In most cases, the District Health Office will no longer provide individual comments to agencies or project owners to expedite the land use review and process. Agencies, project owners, and their agents should apply Department of Health "Standard Comments" regarding land use to their standard project comments in their submittal. Standard comments can be found on the Land Use Planning Review section of the Department of Health website: hops://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Contact information for each Branch/Office is available on that website. Note: Agencies and proiect owners are responsible for adhering to all applicable standard comments and obtaining proper and necessary permits before the commencement of any work. General summary comments have been included for your convenience. However, these comments are not all-inclusive and do not substitute for review of and compliance with all applicable standard comments for the various DOH individual programs. Clean Air Branch 1. All project activities shall comply with the Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR) Planning Ceps. Exhibit 11 Zendo Kern May 24, 2023 Page 2 of 4 Chapters 11-59 and 11-60.1. 2. Control of Fugitive Dust: You must reasonably control the generation of all airborne, visible fugitive dust and comply with the fugitive dust provisions of HAR § 11-60.1-33. Note that activities that occur near existing residences, businesses, public areas, and major thoroughfares exacerbate potential dust concerns. It is recommended that a dust control management plan be developed which identifies and mitigates all activities that may generate airborne and visible fugitive dust and that buffer zones be established wherever possible. 3. Standard comments for the Clean Air Branch are at: https://health.hawaii.gov/e/epo/landuse/ Clean Water Branch All project activities shall comply with the HAR, Chapters 11-53, 11-54, and 11-55. 1. The following Clean Water Branch website contains information for agencies and/or project owners who are seeking comments regarding environmental compliance for their projects with HAR, Chapters 11-53, 11-54, and 11-55: hLtps:Hhealth.hawaii.gov/cwb/clean-water-branch-home- page/cwb- standard -comments/. Hazard Evaluation & Emergency Response Office 1. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) and Phase 11 Site Investigation should be conducted for projects wherever current or former activities on site may have resulted in releases of hazardous substances, including oil or chemicals. Areas of concern include current and former industrial areas, harbors, airports, and formerly and currently zoned agricultural lands used for growing sugar, pineapple or other agricultural products. 2. Standard comments for the Hazard Evaluation & Emergency Response Office are at: https://health.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Indoor and Radiological Health Branch 1. Project activities shall comply with HAR Chapters 11-39, 11-45, 11-46, 11-501, 11- 502, 11-503, and 11-504. 2. Construction/Demolition Involving Asbestos: If the proposed project includes renovation/demolition activities that may involve asbestos, the applicant should contact the Asbestos and Lead Section of the Branch at hLtps:Hhealth.hawaii.gov/irhb/asbestos/. Safe Drinking Water Branch 1. Agencies and/or project owners are responsible for ensuring environmental compliance for their projects in the areas of 1) Public Water Systems; 2) Underground Injection Control; and 3) Groundwater and Source Water Protection Zendo Kern May 24, 2023 Page 3 of 4 in accordance with HAR Chapters 11-19, 11-20, 11-21, 11-23, 11-23A, and 11- 25. They may be responsible for fulfilling additional requirements related to the Safe Drinking Water program: hgps:Hhealth.hawaii.gov/sdwb/. Standard comments for the Safe Drinking Water Branch can be found at: https:Hhealth.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Solid & Hazardous Waste Branch 1. Hazardous Waste Program - The state regulations for hazardous waste and used oil are in HAR Chapters 11-260.1 to 11-279.1. These rules apply to the identification, handling, transportation, storage, and disposal of regulated hazardous waste and used oil. Solid Waste Programs - The laws and regulations are contained in HRS Chapters 339D, 342G, 342H, and 342I, and HAR Chapters 11-58.1 and 11-282. Generators and handlers of solid waste shall ensure proper recycling or disposal at DOH -permitted solid waste management facilities. If possible, waste prevention, reuse, and recycling are preferred options over disposal. The Office of Solid Waste Management also oversees the electronic device recycling and recovery law, the glass advanced disposal fee program, and the deposit beverage container program. Underground Storage Tank Program — The state regulations for underground storage tanks are in HAR Chapter 11-280.1. These rules apply to the design, operation, closure, and release response requirements for underground storage tank systems, including unknown underground tanks identified during construction. 4. Standard comments for the Solid & Hazardous Waste Branch can be found at: h=s:Hhealth.hawaii.gov/epo/landuse/. Wastewater Branch For comments, please email the Wastewater Branch at.doh.wwbgdoh.hawaii.gov. Sanitation / Local DOH Comments: 1. Noise may be generated during demolition and/or construction. The applicable maximum permissible sound levels, as stated in Title 11, HAR, Chapter 11-46, "Community Noise Control," shall not be exceeded unless a noise permit is obtained from the Department of Health. According to HAR § 11-26-35, No person, firm, or corporation shall demolish or clear any structure, place, or vacant lot without first ascertaining the presence or absence of rodents that may endanger public health by dispersal from such premises. Should any such inspection reveal the presence of rodents, the rodents shall be eradicated before demolishing or clearing the structure, site, or vacant lot. A demolition or land clearing permit is required prior to demolition or clearing. Zendo Kern May 24, 2023 Page 4 of 4 Other 1. CDC - Healthy Places - Healthy Community Design Checklist Toolkit recommends that state and county planning departments, developers, planners, engineers, and other interested parties apply these principles when planning or reviewing new developments or redevelopment projects. 2. If new information is found or changes are made to your submittal, DOH reserves the right to implement appropriate environmental health restrictions as required. Should there be any questions on this matter, please contact the Department of Health, Hawaii District Health Office, at (808) 933-0917. JOSH GREEN, M.D. �P•'', �958 ;' v, DAWN N. S. CHANG GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA 0 CHAIRPERSON / BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LUKE •.4' COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA C ; Y MANAGEMENT o V Nar and and l • '� t�••., c�`r . 01 STATE OF HAWAI9 I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI9 DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES Sra�e of Hawa" KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU. HAWAII 96809 May 16, 2023 MEMORANDUM FROM: � DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (glenn.r.higashi0)hawaii.gov) Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGR anhawaii.gov) X Div. of Forestry &Wildlife(rub)irosa.t.terrado(a�hawaii.gov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRM(a).hawaii.gov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kuba(c)-hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (gordon.c.heit(a)hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damate(a)hawaii.gov) TO: BRA- Russell Y. Tsuji, Land AdministratorR,,� 7-ky` SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli'i Beach Park LOCATION: South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004,001 APPLICANT: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by June 9, 2023. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamuraa.hawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. ( ) We have no additional comments. (�) Comments are included/attached. Signed: Q, C4: Print Name: Carty S. Chang, Chief Engineer Division: Engineering Division Date: .tun 1, 2023 Attachments Planning Dept. Exhibit 12 DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tsuji Ref: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli`i Beach Park Location: South Kona, Island of Hawaii TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 Applicant: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation 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). Be advised that 44CFR, Chapter 1, Subchapter B, Part 60 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 zones subject to NFIP requirements are identified on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM). The official FIRMS can be accessed through FEMA's Map Service Center (msc.fema.gov). Our Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT) (http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT) could also be used to research flood hazard information. 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 o Hawaii Island: County of Hawaii, Department of Public Works (808) 961-8327. o Maui/Molokai/Lanai County of Maui, Department of Planning (808) 270-7139. o Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public Works (808) 241-4849. Signed: ar CARTY S. CHANG, CHIEF ENGINEER Date: Jun 1, 2023 JOSH GREEN, M.D. GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA SYLVIA LUKE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA a99e S�'+e of Ham° TO: FROM: SUBJECT: LOCATION: APPLICANT: STATE OF HAWAI`I I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAVI DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU, HAWAII 96809 May 16, 2023 MEMORANDUM CC F.:HA 23-183 DAWN N. S. CHANG CHAIRPERSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT F-& N .4 Cam. r � �< q rn DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (glenn.r.higashi(aftawaii.gov) Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGR(cD_hawaii.gov) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife(rubyrosa.t.terrago(Dhawaii.gov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRM(a-)_hawaii.gov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kuba(c�hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (gordon.c.heit(@hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damate(c�hawaii.gov) Russell Y. Tsuji, Land AdministratorRi.+tire:!G Trey` Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli'i Beach Park South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by June 9, 2023. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamuraehawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. OCCL has received a Site Plan Approval (SPA) Application for the subject project & Locati do ) We have no comments. still pending review. It appears no SSV & ( ) We have no additional comments. SMA application was attached to your letter. Should the County make an SMA determination ( Comments are inuded/attaqhed. prior to OCCLIs review, please forward that Signed: determination letter to OCCL along w/ HR S Chap. 343 compliance. Print Name: Trevor Fitzpatrick Division: OCCL Date: June Attachments Planning Dept. Exhibit 13 JOSH GREEN, M.D. aPjr', �9 Sa ; ^^ y, DAWN N. S. CHANG GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA yj '•' CHAIRPERSON I BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES SYLVIA LUKE f COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA '� • : • MANAGEMENT .i of hand a� � •� o STATE OF HAWAII KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAII DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES Sl"teof KA `OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI `AINA LAND DIVISION P.O. BOX 621 HONOLULU. HAWAII 96809 May 16, 2023 MEMORANDUM FROM: DLNR Agencies: X Div. of Aquatic Resources (glenn.r.higashi(aDhawaii.gov) Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division (DLNR.ENGR(aDhawaii.gov) X Div. of Forestry & Wildlife(rubyrosa.t.terragoa�hawaii.gov) _Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management (DLNR.CWRM(a).hawaii.gov) X Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands (sharleen.k.kuba(a).hawaii.gov) X Land Division — Hawaii District (gordon.c.heita�hawaii.gov) X Aha Moku Advisory Committee (leimana.k.damate(a)hawaii.gov) TO: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land AdministratorR,,� 71k,96 SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) Request: To Conduct Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli'i Beach Park LOCATION: South Kona, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 8-9-004:001 APPLICANT: County of Hawaii, Department of Parks and Recreation Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above -referenced subject matter. Please submit comments by June 9, 2023. If no response is received by the above date, we will assume your agency has no comments. Should you have any questions about this request, please contact Darlene Nakamura at darlene.k.nakamuraa-hawaii.gov. Thank you. BRIEF COMMENTS: ( ) We have no objections. ( ) We have no comments. ( ) We have no additional comments. ( m) Comments are included/attached. Signed: Print Name: LAINIE BERRY, Wildlife Program Mgr. Division: Division of Forestry and Wildlife Date: Jun 14,2023 Attachments Planning Dept. Exhibit 14 JOSH GREEN, M.D. _ aE o w H,y DAWN N.S. CHANG y GOVERNOR I KE KIA'AINA P y' CHAIRPERSON j95� 9 BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE SYLVIA LUKE MANAGEMENT LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I KA HOPE KIA'AINA KI �d LAURA H.E. KAAKUA '•ffi�` FIRST DEPUTY � a ,a c.M. KALEO MANUEL `���[• °°•°°'fir"-` DEPUTY DIRECTOR -WATER AQUATIC RESOURCES STATE OF HAWAI'I I KA MOKU`AINA `O HAWAI`I BO TI BUR A OF CRECREATION BUREAU OF COOOCEAN VEYANCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES CONSERVATION AND KA`OIHANA KUMUWAIWAI'AINA CONSERVATION AND RESOURCES t� ENFORCEMENT ENGINEERING FORESTRYAND WILDLIFE DIVISION OF FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE KAHOOLAWE ISLANPRESERVATION RESERVET OMMISSION 1151 PUNCHBOWL STREET, ROOM 325 LAND HgWp\� STATE PARKS HONOLULU, HAWAII 96813 June 14, 2023 MEMORANDUM Log no. 4118 TO: RUSSELL Y. TSUJI, Administrator Land Division FROM: LAINIE BERRY, Wildlife Program Manager Division of Forestry and Wildlife SUBJECT: Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031) for Facilities Upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli'i Beach Park in South Kona, Hawaii The Department of Land and Natural Resources, Division of Forestry and Wildlife (DOFAW) has received your request for comments for the Proposed Shoreline Setback Variance Application (PL-SSV-2023-000003) and Special Management Area Use Permit Application (PL-SMA-2023-000031). The County of Hawai'i, Department of Parks and Recreation, proposes to conduct facilities upgrades and ADA Improvements to Miloli'i Beach Park in South Kona on the island of Hawai'i, TMK- (3) 8-9-004.001. The proposed project includes the replacement of the existing pavilion (with storage and electrical room) with proper permits to meet current ADA standards-, the replacement of the comfort station to meet current ADA standards-, replacement of the non -potable water storage and booster pump station for the new comfort station-, improvement of the parking lot to be ADA accessible-, improvement of the walkways connecting the comfort station with the parking area and park facilities to be ADA accessible-, reconstruction and resurfacing of the basketball/volleyball courts enclosed within a surrounding chain link fence-, construction of a new playground and a surrounding chain link fence-, designation of a boat turnaround area-, and, installation of vehicular barriers to prevent unauthorized vehicles from accessing the shoreline and the pavilion. The proposed action includes demolishing both the existing pavilion and comfort station. The pavilion use would remain under community control. Parking would include 16 total stalls, including 12 standard stalls and 4 ADA accessible stalls (including 1 van accessible stall). A boat turnaround area adjacent to the pavilion would be paved with "No Parking" signage. The existing solar panels (PV system) on the pavilion would be removed and salvaged and replaced with a new PV/battery power system. The proposed project includes lighting for the restrooms and area lighting along the accessible paths. Security lighting for the pavilion would run off of the PV system. Solar tubes for natural lighting may be considered in the comfort station. Two trees would be removed with construction of the proposed improvements. Excavated materials from construction would be separated and reused on the project site, as possible. Following completion of the proposed improvements, all unpaved areas to be graded would be grassed or hydroseeded. Any remaining construction waste would be removed from the project site. New signage would include accessible parking signs in the parking area and accessible signs for the restrooms. DOFAW concurs with the measures included in the DEA intended to avoid construction and operational impacts to State -listed species including the 'Ope'ape'a or Hawaiian Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus), Koloa maoli or Hawaiian Duck (Anas wyvilliana), Ae'o or Hawaiian Stilt (Himantopus mexicanus knudseni), 'Alae ke'oke'o or Hawaiian Coot (Fulica alai), Nene or Hawaiian Goose (Branta sandvicensis), Honu or Hawaiian Green Sea Turtle (Che/onia mydas), Hawksbill Sea Turtle (Eretmoche/ys imbricate), Hawaiian yellow -faced bee (Hylaeus spp.), Anchialine pool shrimp (Procaris hawaiana and Vetericaris chaceorum), Hawaiian Damselflies (Mega/agrion spp.), and seabirds. For illustrations and guidance related to seabird -friendly light styles that also protect the dark, starry skies of Hawaii please visit https://dlnr.hawaii.gov/wildlife/files/2016/03/ DOC439.pdf. We also appreciate the measures outlined to ensure Best Management Practices are employed during and after construction to contain any soils and sediment with the purpose of preventing damage to near -shore waters and marine ecosystems. DOFAW provides the following additional comments regarding the potential for the proposed work to affect listed species in the vicinity of the project area. The State endangered Ilio holo i ka or Hawaiian Monk Seal (Monachus schauins/andi) could potentially occur or haul out onshore within the vicinity of the proposed project site. If either species is detected within 100 meters of the project area all nearby construction operations should cease and not continue until the focal animal has departed the area on its own accord. The State listed `lo or Hawaiian Hawk (Buteo solitarius) may occur in the project vicinity. Prior to undertaking vegetation clearing, DOFAW recommends that pre -construction surveys of the area be conducted by a qualified biologist following appropriate survey methods (Gorressen et al., 2008) to ensure no Hawaiian Hawk nests are present, which may occur during the breeding season from March to September. The survey should be conducted at least 10 days prior to the start of construction. If an 'lo nest is detected, a buffer zone of 100 meters (330 feet) should be established around it where no construction shall occur until the chick or chicks have fledged or the nest is abandoned, and DOFAW staff should be immediately notified. If adult individuals are detected in the area during construction, all activities within 30 meters (100 feet) of the bird should cease. Work may continue when the bird has left the area on its own. The project area is within the range of the State listed Blackburn's Sphinx Moth (Manduca b/ackburni) or BSM. Larvae of BSM feed on many nonnative hostplants, which includes tree tobacco (Nicotiana g/auca), that grow in disturbed soil. We recommend contacting the Hawai'i Island Branch DOFAW office at (808) 974-4221 for further information about where BSM may be present and whether a vegetation survey should be conducted to determine the presence of plants preferred by BSM. DOFAW recommends removing plants less than one meter in height or during the dry season to avoid harm to BSM. If you intend to either remove tree tobacco over one meter in height or to disturb the ground around or within several meters of these plants, they must be thoroughly inspected by a qualified entomologist for the presence of BSM eggs and larvae. DOFAW recommends using native plant species for landscaping that are appropriate for the area; i.e., plants for which climate conditions are suitable for them to thrive, plants that historically occurred there, etc. Please do not plant invasive species. DOFAW also recommends referring to www.plantpono.org for guidance on the selection and evaluation of landscaping plants and to determine the potential invasiveness of plants proposed for use in the project. DOFAW recommends minimizing the movement of plant or soil material between worksites. Soil and plant material may contain detrimental fungal pathogens (e.g., Rapid `Ohi`a Death), vertebrate and invertebrate pests (e.g., Little Fire Ants, Coqui Frogs, etc.), or invasive plant parts (e.g., African Tulip, Octopus Tree, Trumpet Tree, etc.) that could harm our native species and ecosystems. We recommend consulting the Big Island Invasive Species Committee (BIISC) at (808) 933-3340 to help plan, design, and construct the project, learn of any high -risk invasive species in the area, and ways to mitigate their spread. All equipment, materials, and personnel should be cleaned of excess soil and debris to minimize the risk of spreading invasive species. DOFAW is concerned about impacts on vulnerable birds from nonnative predators such as cats, rodents, and mongooses. We recommend taking action to minimize predator presence; remove cats, place bait stations for rodents and mongoose, and provide covered trash receptacles. Studies on the mainland have linked solar power facilities with the mortality of a variety of avian species, including waterbirds and raptors. In addition to pre -construction surveys, please consider implementing avian mortality avoidance measures during project design and conducting surveys and monitoring during operation to assess the impacts of the project to listed species. DOFAW recommends a wildlife education program that informs site personnel of species that may occur in the vicinity of the project and that could potentially be harmed by solar panels. Site personnel should document sightings of threatened or endangered species, as well as immediately report any mortality or injury of these species to DOFAW so we may assist in avoiding and minimizing impacts. We appreciate your efforts to work with our office for the conservation of our native species. These comments are general guidelines and should not be considered comprehensive for this site or project. It is the responsibility of the applicant to do their own due diligence to avoid any negative environmental impacts. Should the scope of the project change significantly, or should it become apparent that threatened or endangered species may be impacted, please contact our staff as soon as possible. If you have any questions, please contact Myrna N. Girald Perez, Protected Species Habitat Conservation Planning Coordinator at (808) 265-3276 or myrna.girald-perez(a�hawaii.gov. Sincerely, a"7 LAINIE BERRY Wildlife Program Manager