Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCOM 0846.006 1998-2000 J. CURTIS TYLER, III Bus: (808) 326-5684 Co (Memher Fax: (808) 326-5697 District ct 8 8 (North Kona) ~ ctylar(rdin[etpac.net i HAWAPI COUNTY PPIUNCIii f 1 10 C n August 29, 2000 MEMORANDUM: TO: Alfred Robello, Executive Assistant to N~ r t James Y. Arakaki, Chairman FROM: Council Member J. Curtis Tyler III RE: Wa'a Wa'a Road Please circulate the attached communication to all Council Members in reference to Wa'a Wa'a Road. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. Attachment (1) Comm. .No.~~CJy~'~ ~~[p File No. 7 Ref. To: _T Ref. Date g~ 0 12OW Kona Council Office: 77-6399 Nalani Street 0 Suite 104 0 Kailua-Kona 0 Hawaii 0 %740-8980 August 7, 2000 Robert Davis for: Wa'a Wa'a Koa'e Road Action Committee P.O. Box 1993 Pahoa, Hi. 96778 Mr. J. Curtiss Tyler County Councilman 25 Aupuni St. Hilo, Hi. 96720 Dear sir: I am submitting to you a copy of my letter to Mr. Don Hibbard, administrator for the Historic Preservation Division, in Honolulu. I believe that it may also contain information relevant to your office. Reg s, Robert Davis August 7, 2000 Robert Davis for: Wa'a Wa'a Koa'e Road Action Committee P.O. Box 1993 Pahoa, Hi. 96778 attn: Don Hibbard administrator Historic Preservation Division 601 Kamokila Blvd. Room 555 Kapolei, Hi. 96707 Dear sir, I am writing to voice opposition to a proposed public works project on the Big Island. I have already talked at some length to Mark Smith in your local Hilo office regarding this project, but I believe it is more in order to submit a formal letter contesting the county's intentions directly to you. If you are not familiar with the area or project at hand, I am sure that Mark Smith can further outline the situation for you. I would begin by saying that the initial funds to be spent for the project are apparently from a pool over which the Big Island mayor's office has discretionary spending powers, but which originate with funds allocated to another project by the Department of Housing and Urban Development. As the mayor's office seems to pushing ahead without regard to proper procedure, I believe that the matter requires an immediate administrative hold be placed on the project. The project involves the paving of several miles of route 137 which is a rural roadway along the coast of lower Puna in the Kapoho/Wa'a Wa'a/Honolulu Landing area. This is also known as the "Old Government Road", "The King's Highway", "The Historic Puna Trail", and the ancient Hawaiian usage term "Ala Nui Awpuni". This area is rich in archaeological sites many of which line the roadway that is in some areas barely ten feet wide. Although extensive and thorough archaeological surveys of the immediate area are not available, there is enough literature and "common knowledge" among native Hawaiians, local residents, and Big Island archaeologists to substantiate this claim. Whereas the initial source of the funding is a community block grant from H.U.D.(specifically, $84,000 of residual funds from Economic Development Initiative Funds allocated for the Puna Emergency Bypass Road); and whereas the area of impact has great historical and cultural significance; we believe that a 106 review should be mandatory. I understand that the county would require a categorical exclusion from H.U.D. in order to proceed with this project without an environmental assessment or a 106 review. Apparently, the county is using the term "re-surfacing"--which would exempt the project from this requirement--rather than the term "paving". However, this is misleading, in that, the section of roadway in question has never been paved, and we believe there may be a number of federal procedural issues involved including: 1. the historical and cultural nature of this existing stretch of road and the need for a 106 review to assess the impact of such a project on and along the roadway. 2. Under F.E.M.A. and H.U.D. regulations, the question of whether federal funds can even be used to upgrade the existing roadway in this volcanic danger zone. and 3. the avoidance of providing an environmental assessment, at least, and an environmental impact statement at most, for a project that cuts through one of the last remaining littoral forests in lower Puna and which is home to a number of endangered or threatened species, including: the hoary bat, the Hawaiian hawk, and the Hawaiian owl. As for documentation of the historic/cultural nature of the area, I would suggest several sources. First there was a study of the area done by the Bishop Museum in the early seventies. I understand that the survey is less than complete but may shed some light on the historic importance of this stretch of road. Second there is a fairly complete study of the Historic Puna Trail that was done on a section in the Kaloli area which by logical extension would include the stretch of roadway that we are concerned with at this time. Third, I have been told that there exists a study documenting the William Ellis Historic Trail which includes this very stretch of road. Fourth, we have been told by Rodney Oshiro, program manager for the Na Ala Hele program (which I believe was established by the National Park Service and is administered by the Forestry Division of the D.L.N.R.) that the roadway follows a historic trail--the Ala Kahakai--and is of such significant cultural importance that it should not be paved. Fifth, anecdotal evidence suggests that parts of the roadway also coincide with the Ala Nui Awpum, or King's Trail, which is certainly of great historical and cultural importance. Forgive me if any of my assertions are not correct, but I believe that the overwhelming amount of evidence pointing toward the importance of preserving this roadway and the adjacent areas would mandate thorough studies and reviews before starting any work on this project. As the county is forging ahead with this project based on questionable motives and quite possibly violating federal procedures relating to projects involving federal funds, we concerned residents of the area would like to see your office look into the matter immediately. Finally, the county argues--questionably--that they can go forward without doing any damage to existing trees or stonewalls by paving only a ten foot wide strip of roadway. We believe that it is not at all certain that this could be accomplished (without doubt, it would require an engineering report, which has not been done). And given the very narrow confines of the old roadway, the problem of providing drainage would definitely impact the adjacent archaeological sites along some parts of the roadbed. In closing, I would say that there is considerable community opposition to this project; and that the residents, of not only the local area but the island as a whole, deserve and have a legal right to be consulted in the matter as mandated by a 106 review. We believe that the historical/cultural nature of this corridor would be better served by maintaining the road in it's present, unpaved condition and that it is the burden of the county and the office of the mayor to demonstrate that there will be no impact on the historic and cultural nature of the area before they begin any physical work on this project. I would appreciate your time and attention given to this matter; and as I understand that the Mayor's office has already requested the transfer of funds for this project, I would suggest that action on it should be taken as soon as possible. You can also contact me at (808) 965-0205 or Sheryl Kelso at (808) 938-1601. We would be happy to answer any questions that you might have or to assist in gathering facts pertinent to this matter. Sincerely, Robert Davis cc: Mr. Mark Chandler cc: Mr. James Sevaggi cc: Mr. Ernest Molins cc: Mr- Steve Hambalek cc: Mr. J. Curtiss Tyler cc: National Advisory Council on Historic Preservation cc: National Trust for Historic Preservation