2022-06-08 Cultural Resources Commission Meeting Minutes

Home

At this time, Commissioner Matthew Clark disclosed that he worked for ASM Affiliates, who prepared the Archaeological Preservation Plan and Archaeological Monitoring Plan for the makai parcel where the road is intended. He did not personally work on the project,had no prior knowledge of it, and had not been on the property,but did work for Ken Van Bergen. After reviewing the County Code of Conduct, he does not believe this is a conflict of interest. Mr. Arai stated that the request before the Leeward Planning Commission (LPC) is a five- year extension of time to complete and secure final subdivision approval for the 62-lot Single- Family Residential subdivision consisting of lots ranging from 3,000 to about 6,500 square feet in size. The second part of the request is an amendment to Condition K, which focuses on providing the opportunity to bond the proposal, require drain system improvements, along with the other improvements that typically allow the opportunity to be bonded to secure final subdivision approval. In the seven years since the applicant purchased the property in 2013, they accomplished a lot toward completing the subdivision as approved by the Hawai`i County Council. It included the approval of Plan Unit Development permit in 2016, the preparation and issuance of finding of no significant impact for the La'aloa Park in 2018 which was a conditional requirement of their permits. They purchased and secured SMA approval for the makai property to provide a secondary access directly out to Ali`i Drive. They also secured tentative subdivision approval for Phase I of the project, consisting of 18 lots. Most importantly, they secured final approval for Burial Treatment Plan and Data Recovery Plan from the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD) in 2017. Mr. Arai explained that the amendments requested from LPC are necessary for seeking out additional funding for the proposed subdivision. The LPC on April 21, 2022, questioned whether the level of consultation with lineal descendants in the planning of the overall project was sufficient, and whether lineal descendant access issues have been fully considered by SHPD and resolved in the burial treatment plans. And finally, whether the additional lineal descendant access and open space requirements should be proposed to mitigate or minimize project impacts on the overall cultural landscape. Mr. Arai provided the following information to address the concerns of the LPC. The project site is not situated within the Kahulu`u Historic District, as confirmed with the Planning Department. An Archaeological Inventory Survey was prepared by Haun and Associates in 2006 and accepted by SHPD. It mentioned the 14 sites identified as significant for information content, 9 sites for mitigation for data recovery, as well as 2 sites for preservation. The final data recovery plan and the burial treatment plan has been completed and accepted. A cultural assessment study was completed by Kaimipono Consulting Services in 2006 and revised in October 2007. It was referenced in the application to the LPC and referenced in the Planning Director's favorable recommendation on both the SMA and Rezoning applications. Mr. Arai was apologetic for its late submission to the CRC as consultants discovered only days before the meeting that the document had not been distributed. A brief overview of the document was provided. The study concluded that while evidence of traditional cultural practices still exists on the project land, there does not appear to be any evidence of ongoing traditional cultural practices, except perhaps fishing, which while not directly impacted by the project, may indirectly impact this resource. The applicant is unaware of any evidence of traditional or customary native Hawaiian rights being practiced Page 6 of 14 Cultural Resources Commission June 8,2022