The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutEXHIBIT 2 - FINAL EALETTER OF TRANSMITTAL JPE CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING DATE:FEBRUARY 18, 2020 POBOX 551751 ATTENTION: ALEX ROY Kapa'au HI 96755 808-854-4888 TMK: 3) 5 -6- 001 : 082 TO: Michael Yee, Director Planning Department County of Hawaii N Aupuni Center, 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 r)`> Hilo, HI 96720 co G_.t Subject:EA- PUAKEA GUEST RANCH 3 PLEASE FIND THE ATTACHED TRANSMITTED FOR REVIEW AND USE: z ca COPIES DATE PAGES DESCRIPTION 3 02/14/2020 343 FINAL EA — Puakea Guest Ranch COMMENTS: Per your email request, attached, three hard copies of the FEA for submission to OEQC. Sincerely, Jim Pe.-rs , PE JPE 1 131449 FEA FONSI Subject: FEA FONSI From: "Roy, Alex" <AIex.Roy@hawaiicounty.gov> Date: 2/14/20, 11:19 AM To: J PEDERSEN <jpe.jim@gmail.com> Jim, Go ahead and submit the FEA hard copies and scanned pdf to this office for submission to OEQC. Make sure the pdf of the FEA is searchable (per OEQC). I will need at least three hard copies of the FEA. LMK if you have any questions. Alex J. Roy County of Hawai'i Planning Department 101 Pauahi St., Ste. 3 Hilo, HI 96720 alex.rov( hawaiicounty.gov 808-961-8140 CLG Coordinator(Hawai'i County) Cultural Resources Commission (Staff) Banyan Drive Hawai'i Redevelopment Agency (Staff) 1 of 1 2/18/20, 1:43 PM FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT 0N C7 Puakea Guest Ranch TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 1 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai'i Island, State of Hawaii The Historic Puakea Ranch February 14, 2020 Prepared for: County of Hawaii Planning Department Aupuni Center, Suite 3 101 Pauahi Street Hilo, HI 96720 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT Puakea Guest Ranch TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawaii Island, State of Hawaii APPLICANT: Christie Cash, Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch PO Box 190768 Hawi, HI 96719 APPROVING AGENCY: County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo HI 96720 CONTRIBUTING CONSULTANTS: Ron Terry, Ph.D. Alan Haun, Ph.D. Jim Pedersen, PE Geometrician Associates Haun and Associates JPE Hilo, HI 96721 Kailua-Kona, HI 96740 Kapa'au, HI 96755 CLASS OF ACTION: Use of Land Within Site on Historic Register This document is prepared pursuant to: The Hawai'i Environmental Policy Act, Chapter 343, Hawai'i Revised Statutes(HRS), and Title 11,Chapter 200.1, Hawaii Department of Health Administrative Rules(HAR). Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment this page intentionally left blank] Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment TABLE OF CONTENTS SUMMARY PART 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND E.A. PROCESS 1 1.1 Property Ownership and Project Location and Description 1 1.2 Environmental Assessment Process 6 1.3 Public Involvement and Agency Coordination 16 PART 2: ALTERNATIVES 17 2.1 Proposed Action 17 2.2 No Action 17 2.3 Alternatives Evaluated and Dismissed from Further Consideration 17 PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION 18 3.1 Physical Environment 18 3.1.1 Geology, Soils and Geologic 18 3.1.2 Climate, Drainage and Flood Hazards 19 3.1.3 Water Quality 21 3.1.4 Flora, Fauna, and Ecosystems 25 3.1.5 Air Quality, Noise and Scenic Resources 29 3.1.6 Hazardous Materials, Toxic Substances and Hazardous Conditions 31 3.2 Socioeconomic and Cultural 32 3.2.1 Socioeconomic Characteristics 32 3.2.2 Cultural Resources 33 3.2.3 Archaeological and Architectural Resources 39 3.3 Infrastructure 40 3.3.1 Utilities, Energy, Public Facilities and Public Services 40 3.3.2 Roadways and Traffic 42 3.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts 44 3.5 Required Permits and Approvals 44 3.6 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies 45 3.6.1 Hawai'i State Plan 45 3.6.2 Hawai'i State Land Use Law 45 3.6.3 Hawaii County Zoning and General Plan 45 3.6.4 Special Permit Criteria Consistency 50 3.6.5 North Kohala Community Development Plan 51 PART 4: DETERMINATION 53 PART 5: FINDINGS AND SUPPORTING REASONS 53 REFERENCES 56 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment LIST OF TABLES TABLE 1 Proposed Action Features 15 TABLE 2 Plant Species on Property 26 TABLE 3 Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics 32 LIST OF FIGURES FIGURE 1 Location Map 2 FIGURE 2 Current Layout of Puakea Ranch Property 3 FIGURE 3 Property Photos 7 FIGURE 4 Site Plan 14 FIGURE 5 Current Entrance of Puakea Ranch Property 42 LIST OF APPENDICES APPENDIX la Comments in Response to Early Consultation APPENDIX lb Comments to Draft EA and Responses APPENDIX 2 Cultural Impact Assessment APPENDIX 3 Archaeological Inventory Survey APPENDIX 4 SHPD Correspondence APPENDIX 5 Traffic Assessment Report ii Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment SUMMARY OF THE PROPOSED ACTION, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The owners of Puakea Ranch are requesting a Special Permit for use of a portion of the property, which is a collection of cottages, gardens and other structures listed on the State Register of Historic Places, as a Guest Ranch. The Proposed Action would continue the vacation rentals and construct facilities that would allow for various functions including weddings and community events. It would involve adaptation of existing Puakea Ranch structures, four of which are currently used as vacation rentals, construction of new structures including accessible restrooms and mitigation measures to address noise concerns. Ranching and gardening uses of the property would continue and expand. The maximum occupancy of the vacation rentals would increase from 18 to 38, and guest and non-guest (primarily community) events with attendees up to 100 would be allowed (with two events a year at 350 people). A variety of restrictions would limit the hours, days of the week, and uses of various parts of the property. Any amplification devices will be restricted to State standards for residential uses at all property lines. Hawaii Administrative Rules HAR), Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control" establishes maximum permissible sound levels in dBA according to zoning districts. Residentially zoned land is considered Class A as provided in section 11-46-3. Class A requires the lowest maximum permissible sound levels. For comparison, Agriculturally zoned land is considered Class C and allows for the highest maximum permissible sound levels. A biological survey found no threatened or endangered plant species on the property, which hosts a variety of introduced species found in landscaping. The only endangered animal is the Hawaiian hoary bat, which forages and roosts at low densities throughout the entire Island of Hawaii. The precautionary measure of restricting vegetation removal to dates outside June 1 to September 15 will avoid impacts to these bats. The action has been designed for adaptive re-use of historic structures that will foster interpretation of Kohala's historic heritage and provide the funds needed for maintenance. No impacts to significant archaeological features would occur. Normal operational traffic is not expected to have any significant impact on cumulative traffic operations. iii Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment PART 1: PROJECT DESCRIPTION, LOCATION, AND ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PROCESS 1.1 Property Ownership and Project Location and Description The 32.411-acre subject property is designated by TMK (3) 5-6-001:082 and is located mauka of Akoni Pule Highway (State Highway 270) several miles south of Hawi town, in the district of North Kohala (Figures 1-2). The property is owned by Christine L. Cash and James H. Nelson, IV and Livmar Enterprises, Inc., who are requesting a Special Permit for use of the property, which is a collection of cottages, gardens and other structures listed on the State Register of Historic Places, as a Guest Ranch. The Proposed Action would continue the vacation rentals and construct facilities that would allow for various functions including weddings and community events. It would involve adaptation of existing Puakea Ranch structures, four of which are currently used as vacation rentals, construction of new structures and implementation of mitigation measures. Ranching and gardening uses of the property would continue and expand. To fully understand the Proposed Action, some preliminary background on the property and its history are necessary. The Puakea Ranch headquarters and surrounding areas were transformed as part of Kohala's 19th century transition from traditional Hawaiian agricultural landscapes, which were integral parts of mauka-makai resource mar agement focused around ahupua'a, to a succession of commercial agricultural ventures. Puakea Ranch began in the 1870s with Dr. James Wight, who tried sheep and sugarcane and finally focused on cattle, building a successful operation on thousands of acres that he ran until his death at the age of 91 in 1905.The ranch's boundaries grew and shrank through a series of acquisitions 2nd amalgamations. Parker Ranch began leasing the Puakea Ranch lands from the James Wight Estate in 1932, and Richard Smart of Parker Ranch purchased its lands outright in 1946. Throughout the decades, immigrant laborers who worked in the canefields and paddocks left an indelible stamp on the landscape, which provides much of the character of the property today. For example, Zenjiro Kawamoto and his wife Wasa Watabayashi came to North Kohala from Hiroshima as part of this migration. They settled at Puakea Ranch and moved into what would eventually be called the "Cowboy House". The Kawamotos raised three children at the ranch: Masato (Johnny), Yoshio (Yoshi), and Thelma. The family went on to oversee the operations of the Puakea Ranch for four generations. Yoshi Kawamoto and Parker Ranch carpenter, Mr. Yamanaka, built Yoshi's House in 1949 for Yoshi and his wife, Margaret, to raise their family. This is the original site of the grand two-story plantation house when the Wright Family Estate was still in control of the property, prior to it being leased by Parker Ranch. It is speculatec that the original Plantation Manager's home, likely built in the 1870-80s, fell into disrepair and was taken down and salvaged for lumber and windows by Parker Ranch in the 1930s. Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 1. Location Map VA will:ap Location W NONOKAA L WAIMEA A w-- 1' Y _ Hilow, t s.,, i KAILUA ItkIJEWEL. ,,, ‘.KEALAKEKUA P OA 0 1' v4lik PAHALA fr AALEHUfriliZ(:'''' 1\t4I r'll ' cl1{- 1' L2,1'e 1411t* es. \ X t -- J,o G w f ti; Ci Gc_..•-1rSt` G rte lib y ;r--- 4 i A, , ____,5,(-------\,.. ..,,,_,,_ s j J J`l\\. f 4 4114.0°‘ ti L__k4j.7r c, .., ,f, 44,-"':',.,...,./ \---c.N./.-"' \ L: ilk , 11:,,.:4 *\ L--„ _...---1---.., ' f ,f i c, __j„,-p - I' l-,__--F, rm------_,it,,,, i1' ___:, ___...,, k C II Of>IGA! = . . l swan Pa , 6_ , 4 pq 2 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 2. Current Layout of Puakea Ranch Property IEP JEAN I -— 1 1 1 s 1 a ; NAWAfI STATE 1 n NIyTGR10 LIMITER • 1I• jj, 40”E FAf,URE 4: Y' :.5.;.f/VEGETABLE GARDEN Ali KEAwE •d f`','Mxi' 19 'Ili i ,"', r.„ I AMEt COrTA6E- "A GASURE AI I r• ,. A COW60v HOSE c 1880) EKOIoMAI! BOUBAINVN, J{i MID OHANA HOU5E M 17:1 A 0,C7LLI3.,r A 1 T f . at a JTE:N CKEVCOOP AVA PLUM LINE, 4F/100 JNED J r I Eb r" EUCA.L,,, , Ci: _ _ mm z81ONAKU–`!AERED4TONE'!0 r r, - 1916//ILEA',t - - - L. tl,Ii siTUAKEA • WRITE ct4WCRL)) T... ZLNATIVENAWPIIANYOP% vi{l1Rlf IN NAW11KAAA%IV ep'. nAKnl .....y....., ,Iitill (P['AK' i r f EAYINNAE T°y.OT. nE 4! 5,2gsel AEONI D°LE H 6xWAY SIL} HAWI,HAWAi19aly J/ Uiwlh 8.6.1q•08°5 YJ • • !_.0. www.WAxuRA eN con 11V// E z. r:-. -m su YONEI:A.,4PN L'1A E 3 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment In the 1980s, Parker Ranch sold 200 acres of the Puakea Ranch lands around the headquarters to a real estate developer, and the Kawamoto family and other ranch employees relocated. Parker Ranch discontinued ranching operations at Puakea and the homes were rented to different local families until the 200-acre property was sold for subdivision in 2002. The Puakea Ranch headquarters, including the present property and its buildings, subsequently fell into disrepair. The Puakea Ranch headquarters was purchased by Christie Cash and her partner James Nelson in 2006. The plan was to create a low-key, low-density family place that could be an alternative to the resorts. The owners have been working for 13 years with local archaeologists and historic preservation architects to authentically restore the homes, buildings and gardens of Puakea Ranch. Without time-consuming and expensive maintenance, there is a constant threat of dilapidation and eventual demolition. Today the ranch provides overnight vacation rental accommodations, which helps to support the property and provides the income necessary for maintenance. The area was informally recorded by the landowners in a June 2009 National Register of Historic Places form. The ranch buildings were subsequently assigned the State Inventory of Historic Places SIHP) number 50-10-02-9071 by the State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD). The current extent of the ranch is depicted in Figure 2. The buildings consist of the following: The Saddle House, James Cottage (built 1920s), The Cowboy House (1880s), The Toy Box, The Tool Shed, The Chicken Coop, The Tree House, Yoshi's House (1940s) and Miles Away (1930s). The site was formally listed on the State Register of Historic Places on August 8, 2009. The restoration work not only preserves buildings but also is meant to honor the ranch and farming traditions of Puakea Ranch in an ongoing, living way. Local ranchers have used the corrals for branding and roundups. The owners raise horses, cattle, and chickens, and maintain gardens and orchards as they work towards a self-sustaining homestead. The vacation rental guests enjoy experiencing the historic ranch's cowboy activities as well as learning the history of Puakea Ranch through the books, historic photographs and historic relics exhibited on the property and in the homes. In addition to its income-producing activities, the owners have made the ranch available for a variety of community events. For example, the ranch has hosted local schools for overnight excursions and docents for the Mo'okini Heiau Children's Day organized by Kumu Leimomi Lum. Puakea Ranch regularly donates overnight stays to local schools and community fundraising events, including Waimea Country School, Parker School, HPA School, North Kohala Community Resource Center, the North Kohala Hospital, Kona &Waimea Hospices and many off-island private and charter schools. A list of all existing and future structures and other facilities under the Proposed Action is contained in Table 1 and illustrated in Figure 4 (Site Plan). The area proposed for use is 14.96 acres of the 32.411-acre property; the remaining area would continue to be used as grazing pastures, orchards, animal corrals, and open space. All new structures would be contained in an even more restricted area of 2.14 acres, in a portion of the property that will not visually affect the historic character of some of the other structures and will also minimize noise and visual disruption to neighboring properties. Additionally, extensive landscape mitigation plantings are central to the development of the designated area to block both noise and views to the area from surrounding properties. 4 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment The Guest Ranch would be able to accommodate as many as 38 visitors in the seven rental units and the event area, an increase from the current occupant capacity of 18. It would host group activities such as weddings and family reunions, which would be accommodated in a new event area established to accommodate parking, temporary tents and portable toilets. Additionally, the Tree House is currently used and would continue to be used as a farm dwelling for the owner and caretaker. Within the special permit application that structure would be proposed to convert to a guest unit and plans to permit that structure or replace it would proceed once granted the special permit. The maximum number of persons on property at any given time for guest events will be limited to 100 outside guests(with two events a year at 350 people). Events with more than 38 attendees will be limited to Friday, Saturday and Sunday and will involve utilization of port-a-potties. Event hours will be limited to 9am-8pm (Sunday-Thursday) and 9am-10pm (Friday and Saturday). The current no-noise policy after 10pm will continue. Any amplification devices will be restricted to State standards for residential uses at all property lines. Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control" establishes maximum permissible sound levels in dBA according to zoning districts. Residentially zoned land is considered Class A as provided in section 11-46-3. Class A requires the lowest maximum permissible sound levels. For comparison, Agriculturally zoned land is considered Class C and allows for the highest maximum permissible sound levels. The Guest Ranch would include a certified kitchen to allow catering for guest events and other special events. Guest amenities would include the existing swimming pool and poolside pavilion. Horseback riding and self-guided ranch tours would also be available. In addition to its everyday function as a guest ranch for visitors, the Puakea Guest Ranch will host private events for non-guests; grow and sell food and utilize the certified kitchen for catering; offer horseback riding, equine therapy, cooking, art, and yoga classes; and host community activities and functions such as community pancakes & kites festival, senior functions, community fundraising events and local school functions. As with guest events, event hours will be limited to 9am-8pm Sunday-Thursday), 9am-10pm (Friday and Saturday). The Puakea Guest Ranch would also like to host up to two (2) community events annually that will allow up to 350 guests. For these community events, event hours will be limited to 9am-9pm Sunday), 9am-10pm (Friday and Saturday). The property is within the State Land Use Agricultural District and a Special Permit from the County of Hawai'i (County) Leeward Planning Commission (Planning Commission) is required to legally undertake the Proposed Action. Obtaining the Special Permit would allow advertisement as a "Guest Ranch" offering activities, opportunities and events, such as marriages, birthday parties, anniversary celebrations, farm to fork events to our guests, local schools, and our local community members. Puakea Ranch is an alternative to the resorts, condos, and concrete structures that most of the visitors to Hawaii Island experience. Puakea Ranch sets an example of true sustainable agriculturally driven and historical tourism for our island in an agricultural, rustic, historic setting. Guests and the community can learn about the rich history of the ranch and the surrounding area, plantation life, the Paniolo, Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Japanese, Filipino, German, British, missionary and native Hawaiian cultures that make North Kohala what it is today. Puakea Ranch currently employs a crew of eight part time staff(up to 20 hours per week), two full time salary employees and a host of local outside contractors island wide. Four of the jobs are agriculturally related: gardener, grounds keeping, horse wrangler. The goal is to continue to plant lavender, pineapple, dragon fruit and other small, specialty crops and employ additional local community members to support agricultural and tourism business. The subject parcel is served by an existing County water meter and currently incorporates rainwater catchment for irrigation needs. In order to accommodate additional water demand from the Guest Ranch, the owners propose to expand the catchment capacities. Additionally, the site also is exploring access to water from the Kohala Ditch, which would be used for farming purposes. The owners are also planning construction of a well and holding tank to supplement, as needed, the project's water needs. The owners propose to construct a septic or enhanced septic system to address the wastewater requirements of the project. The primary wastewater needs will be for the proposed restrooms. The system will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health, per Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems." 1.2 Environmental Assessment Process The County of Hawai'i Planning Department has determined that because the Proposed Action occurs within a site on the State Historic Register, an EA pursuant to Chapter 343, Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS), Hawai'i's EIS law, is necessary. The Planning Department is acting as the approving agency, as the Proposed Action requires a County of Hawai'i Special Permit. This Environmental Assessment (EA) process is being conducted in accordance with HRS Chapter 343, along with its implementing regulations, Title 11, Chapter 200.1, of the Hawai'i Administrative Rules (HAR). According to HRS Chapter 343, an EA is prepared to determine impacts associated with an action, to develop mitigation measures for adverse impacts, and to determine whether any of the impacts are significant according to thirteen specific criteria. Part 4 of this document states the findings that no significant impacts are expected to occur; Part 5 lists each criterion and presents the preliminary findings for each made by the County of Hawai'i Planning Department, the approving agency. If, after considering the comments to the Draft EA, the approving agency concludes that, as anticipated, no significant impacts would be expected to occur, the agency will issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI), and the action will be permitted to proceed to the necessary permits and approvals. If the agency concludes that significant impacts are expected to occur as a result of the Proposed Action, an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be prepared. 6 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos M u x---.....---,,,:-..... at a.Aerial- mauka b.Aerial- makai (Miles Away in foreground) Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos, continued 7"`" i;,-,Bli , I) . 1,.., , 7,„, . I . i c.Yoshi's House d.Ohana House El LIT 1 I 8 Puakea Guest EnvironmentalAssessment Figure 3Ranch. Property Photos, continued vV I • ,4 ,'. i 1 17 fir i''''''-.4; a ee.Cowboy House f. James'Cotta: ir 4. 1. ,jr, lite El% , .4„. dam 1 t pr.-- i.1-:- ._- -7.......„_. ,„ ‘,.., 4:.....;-..---;„:„.. r..„.2_,:.,--- ..„:„..„....--_, .,_,..:„.._., _,..7,--,,,:.,„.e..,;.. . :......„... -- 3., ",-0.1.r 9 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos, continued soh s r g. Event Area-Chicken Coop behind tree h. Tool Shed 0 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos, continued 41, i.Aerial-Event Area in foreground j. Monkeypod-General Parking Area aiwc 4 fF +r 11 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos, continued ri k.Garden A I. Smokestack(prior to 2006 collapse) z gar• r rr r ro- g?y i 40 •r . r F4 • 11 12 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Figure 3. Property Photos, continued fi ' r 1 3, m. Pavilion and Pool n. Treehouse k Gint. .;,. ' . t s ". 4 .c by yam. »-..ap I/.. m n s.' Yom .`. 4,, a-r st M 4 1% telre 44114s,. y 13 CD II —1 gym aa1:1 Ni. 7S S71 N. 53 a w o en ti 5 r N. pX tr,„ arte•. 1 1 It . 4v, t{o ..'< 6+N Ai 1"Jr m7i y4 r i:i7: 6::;: i.:.1--7:::-..:..7................ 0ic r `' {\\/ -`.tip )goo N.,....) 3 i i! v, . . hrr * Q'7• ...tC 3 Jf3 y4771``_ A 'it` . a'. . r '° y . f/' '"~ I {lg://N. 3 h•F r4 , ''v .' . v. ••ti 1`" ` 8 Aj 74 w4v`i r 5 J-.0 1y 9 A is .u at41. rr w it 1/1 o oflr------ ss's-s'.--"'"-f-jr-,L/ gv _ ii a=' e / / 44 q m I Gmat 6 g %/ l co a+ CZ L----..... 07 i 7i/ - 1 4V t RI M ihe !n m mca o chi 7ro y i m/t / a s z M E / /// m 5'6' '47s* /// i y ,;, 8";•-•—... Q If 056',22 3T4.B>p y ff/!/ /. VI ii//,- ..„,e / / 2749sl /44. 4 7 ,rt 0 t Ln nCO In3 ii 1.1 j yZ 4 1' 1> 17/ c7 i y m A 6.teIZ a WI 4/•.. N\...,_0x8 ryj e i moo" 8 ro o f f 8 n 6 i i o dX o m , g Q a ff t .1)//)2 i IIni4m V7lI 1 1f l r(//./. I 7 E f0 f0 A3 CO M 4 Ct ;arv tTt C C `c c ` t0° c II IL 0 E .. u y. c.c a r c.0 ry o © ro a fa z• a c a V C 1 O 01 D d u, VI Un +n u, v, +n (n a a a +n v' a4., CU z U, aoo r‘ Zt oo) „ al'-n `' C ``' coo Celt W 1-1 C o CO in0in4nuitil coarflro1, aa +n Z - - ` Z ` ` ZZ6., V 3 > ccc M i) IA In In L h Q , coaLL c ocu C 4-+ o Ui a u7 E e a c actdW p L1 b LL0. LL CU g CU CU {U t t2 N L4A N CC a a E0 ' 0000 '. < WWcuo ' o li 2 I E I I I I C Q C Opt > CUZcott ".' tto ''r, ''ii rC $- ZZZ 'nW — o .Q w • N w tU wa cu 4-, -a a 1- a > > > > N '+- C c di 7 Q L7 C7 C7 C D t3 in 0 P fp Ln w Zoccu0012 > >, >, i' P v .2 cu cu cu E ;c C c cu --.u - v, 00 " 7 © 004n a I:. 2 222 `$ S -- - 4-2 •- 4-/41ay-, i j c co m © cU ch CD aLDLDLOE Cng= g 5u 77 0 t u_ u_ u_ co 1:13 gLLA Z C O r cu m N Lei cu cc, zfij a0 Dcro2 D L- 0 -C" 2 -- a a 2 $,' a d 2 0 C a _ .- - u72 c a' cu 173 C u8 2U Ecu LwI- = _ew15a C rt p E yr co E , Lri7) a amu°H u_ m Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment 1.3 Public Involvement and Agency Coordination The following agencies, organizations and individuals, who were selected based on their potential to jurisdiction, expertise or interest in the Proposed Action, were consulted in various stages of the development of the environmental assessment: Federal: National Park Service State: Department of Land and Natural Resources Department of Health Department of Transportation, Highways Division, Hawai'i District DLNR-State Historic Preservation Division Office of Hawaiian Affairs, Honolulu and West Hawai'i County: Civil Defense Agency County Council Department of Public Works Department of Environmental Management Department of Water Supply Planning Department Police Department Fire Department North Kohala Community Development Plan Action Committee Private: North Kohala Community Growth Management Group Sierra Club Neighboring Residents: Mark Torrance No Boundaries Ltd Christine Sprowl Trust Aloha Aina Properties Oba Ranch/Robert Morrison Heidi Calhoun Janeth Parker TTEE Alexandra Star& Leonard Muzsek Michael Hall Wu, Chen Fu C/O Huang, Mali Copies of communications received during early consultation are contained in Appendix la. Notice of the availability of the Draft EA was published in the August 23, 2019 OEQC Environmental Notice. Appendix lb contains written comments on the Draft EA and the responses to these comments. Various places in the EA have been modified to reflect input received in the comment letters; additional or modified non-procedural text is denoted by underline, as in this paragraph. 16 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment PART 2: ALTERNATIVES 2.1 Proposed Action The Proposed Action is to allow through a Special Permit the establishment of a Guest Ranch on the property (see Section 1.1, Figure 4, and Table 1 for action details). 2.2 No Action Under the No Action Alternative, the Guest Ranch would not be permitted. The legally non-conforming vacation rentals would continue, but special events such as weddings and family reunions for paying guests would not be permitted to occur. Although this would avoid some environmental impacts, it would also preclude community benefits including jobs, income, and tax revenues associated with the Guest Ranch, and more importantly, it would preclude the substantial benefit that the ranch has long provided to the Kohala Community by offering a unique venue for community events, generally at a minimal or no charge. Finally, it is uncertain whether the substantial financial burden of maintaining the historic cottages could be sustained without a source of income, absent purchase by government or a non-profit agency with a large, dedicated funding source. A wealthy individual might be able to maintain the cottages, but there is no guarantee that the ranch would continue to be available for public events or offer any other public benefit. To date, no individual or government or non-profit agency has offered to purchase the property and undertake this task. The No Action Alternative forms the baseline against which environmental impacts associated with the Proposed Action are measured. 2.3 Alternatives Evaluated and Dismissed from Further Consideration As stated in Section 1.1, the property is currently zoned Agricultural, with a minimum lot size of 20 acres. There are no economically feasible alternative uses for the property. Rezoning, subdividing or converting the property to another productive use is not viable. Therefore, no other alternative projects are being considered at the present time and none are being advanced in this Environmental Assessment. 17 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment PART 3: ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING, IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The Puakea Ranch property is referred to throughout this EA as the property. The term project area is used to describe the general environs in this area of Kohala. 3.1 Physical Environment 3.1.1 Geology, Soils and Geologic Hazards Environmental Setting Geologically, the property is located on the flanks of Kohala Volcano. The surface of the property consists of Pololu Volcanics lava flows that occurred more than 250,000 years before the present Wolfe and Morris 1996). The property soils are classified by the U.S. Natural Resources Conservation Service (formerly the Soil Conservation Service) as Hawi silty clay and Kohala silty clay. These similar soils are well drained soils that formed from weathered basic volcanic ash and residuum from basalt derived from volcanic ash over lava flows. These soils are typically thick, with several feet to bedrock and only limited rock outcroppings. The permeability is moderate, runoff is slow to medium depending on slope, and the erosion hazard is moderate.The capability subclass for both soil series found here is Ille, which indicates severe limitations that affect the choice of plants and/or require special conservation practices, as well as being erodible on steep slopes. These soils are used for grazing, with small areas of the Kohala series used for orchard and truck crops (U.S. Soil Conservation Service 1973). The agricultural utility of land in Hawai'i was assessed in the 1970s by the U.S. Soil Conservation Service and mapped as part of the Agricultural Lands of Importance to the State of Hawai'i (ALISH) map series. Three categories of valuable agricultural land are identified: Prime, Unique, and Other. Prime Land "has the soil quality, growing season, and moisture supply needed to produce sustained high yields of crops economically when treated and managed... according to modern farming methods." Island-wide, Prime Lands constitute about 4 percent of the surface, Unique Lands less than 1 percent, Other Important Lands about 18 percent, and Unclassified the remaining 78 percent. No Prime or Unique Agricultural Land is present on the property, but soil and rainfall combine here to produce satisfactory grazing lands, which are classified under Other Important Lands. The Island of Hawai'i experiences high seismic activity and is at risk from major earthquake damage (USGS 2000), especially to structures that are poorly designed or built. On October 15, 2006, two large earthquakes of magnitude 6.7 and 6.0 struck the west side of Hawai`i Island, causing extensive damage in West Hawai'i. An even stronger magnitude 6.9 occurred under Kilauea Volcano on May 3, 2018. The 2006 event was strong enough to bring the historic smokestack from the sugar mill down. The historic structures survived with minimal damage. These events reinforce the importance of properly maintaining these structures for historic preservation. Volcanic hazard as assessed by the U.S. Geological Survey at the property is Zone 9, on a scale of ascending risk from 9 to 1 (Heliker 1990:23). The low hazard risk is based on the fact that Kohala Volcano, the 18 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment oldest volcano on the island, has not erupted for 60,000 years and is possibly extinct. The property does not appear to be subject to subsidence, landslides or other forms of mass wasting. Impacts and Mitigation Measures In general, soil and geologic conditions impose no constraints on the area, and development of the property for the proposed use is reasonable. Appropriate seismic standards would be followed during any new building construction, per building codes. The existing structures have heretofore experienced no damage from seismic activity and are periodically inspected by the owners to ensure safety and soundness. 3.1.2 Climate, Drainage and Flood Hazards Existing Environment The climate in the vicinity of the property, which ranges in elevation from 500 to 600 feet above sea level, is mild, with a mean annual rainfall of about 43 inches and a mean annual temperature of about 74 degrees (Giambelluca et al 2014; U.H. Hilo-Geography 1998:57). Maps of wind energy potential produced by Hawaiian Electric indicate that this area of Kohala has some of the highest average wind speeds on the Island of Hawai'i, at cver 20 mph at 165 feet in altitude https://www.hawaiianelectric.com/documents/clean energy_hawaii/renewable energy sources/ hawaii county hawaii island SPD 50m 19 July 04.pdf Accessed January 2019). As discussed in detail below in this section, the world's climate is changing and requires consideration in any development. Wildfire is an important concern in the dry, windy climate of leeward North Kohala, which has experienced many fires through the decades owirg to arson, car exhaust, campfires and firecrackers, among other causes. Fires started on any given property can harm not only the owner's property but nearby property as well. Puakea Ranch has no known wildfires in the recent past. The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) 1551660128C 9/16/1988) indicates that the property is in Flood Zone X, outside of the 500-year floodplain http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT/accessed January 2019). The project area has no named perennial or intermittent freshwater bodies, with the nearest feature being Lipoa Gulch approximately two miles east in Hawi. No significant ephemeral drainages are present on or near the property. Maps printed by the Pacific Tsunami Warning Center and the County of Hawaii Civil Defense Agency indicate that the property is about a mile mauka of the zone that should be evacuated during a tsunami warning, which in the Puakea area are well makai of Akoni Pule Highway https://tsunami.coast.noaa.gov/#/Accessed January 2019). 19 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Impacts and Mitigation Measures Puakea Ranch enforces a strict no open flame rule with all guests. Livestock on property are managed to eliminate heavy brush. Areas around structures are manicured as mowed lawns and irrigated from the catchment tank water. No tiki torches are allowed. No floating lanterns are allowed. All candles are contained within glass receptacles. Guests use propane grills located outdoors on the uncovered lanais. Guests are not allowed to start any fires. There is a designated area for campfires that consist of a sunken pit with a surrounding metal ring. All campfires are prearranged and managed by Puakea Ranch staff. A water hose is present to ensure proper extinguishing of fires. Additionally, no fires are allowed during dry and windy conditions. The property lacks flood zones and any streams or other water bodies, and no impacts to flood zones or water features will occur. Concerning drainage, the Hawai'i County Code Chapter 27, Flood Control, requires increases in stormwater runoff for events up to and including the 10-year flood to be contained on-site. Flows greater than the 10-year flood, which are generally assumed to be equivalent to pre-development runoff because even with no development the ground becomes saturated quickly during such large events, are allowed to flow off site. Typical measures for larger sites include drywells and detention ponds. For this project, especially considering the proposed roof catchment, the amount of expected runoff calculated will be relatively minor and will not alter the general drainage pattern above or below the development. Any net increase in runoff will be addressed through the use of onsite detention using basins and/or swales subject to the review and approval of the Department of Public Works. Localized effects need to be mitigated through the use of proper practices and drainage details. All recommended and required details will be shown on grading and drainage plans with a focus on sediment control during grubbing and temporary detention of runoff using volume based storm water quality facilities. Climate Change and Sea Level Rise There is a scientific consensus that the earth is warming due to manmade increases in greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, according to the United Nations' Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (UH Manoa Sea Grant 2014). Global mean air temperatures are projected to increase by at least 2.7°F by the end of the century. This will be accompanied by the warming of ocean waters, expected to be highest in tropical and subtropical seas of the Northern Hemisphere. Wet and dry season contrasts will increase, and wet tropical areas in particular are likely to experience more frequent and extreme precipitation. For Hawaii, where warming air temperatures are already quite apparent, not only is the equable climate at risk but also agriculture, ecosystems, the visitor industry and public health. For actions in inland areas such as the property, which ranges in elevation from 500 to 600 feet above sea level and does not depend on coastal roads for access, the key direct consideration is 20 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment not sea level rise but instead the potential for increased runoff from storms, increased fire risk from droughts, and higher wind loads from more frequent hurricanes. Climate change may also lead to larger storms, with greater rainfall on an hourly, daily, seasonal or annual basis. This can lead to increased runoff and gulch flow. The property is not vulnerable to flooding, excessive runoff or erosion, and the very minor scale of proposed improvements would not lead to any appreciable additional concerns. Larger storms may also lead to higher winds. To account for this, any new structures must completely conform with the Hawai'i Wind Design Provisions For New Constructions contained within the "International Building Code, 2006 Edition" as copyrighted and published in 2006 by the International Code Council, Inc., as adopted and amended by Chapter 180 of Title 3, of the Hawaii Administrative Rules entitled "State Building Code." Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that instead of more annual rainfall, climate change may also involve long droughts and even overall drier conditions, increasing wildfire risk. The precautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk discussed in Section 3.1.1 will mitigate additional potential risk. 3.1.3 Water Quality Water quality in the nearshore waters of leeward North Kohala is determined by inputs from both overland flow into nearshore surface waters and groundwater flowing out to sea. In this part of North Kohala very little overland flow occurs, as the combination of moderate slopes, dense vegetation and moderately permeable creates an environment where most rainfall is rapidly absorbed into the ground and runoff and erosion are limited. So little overland flow occurs that gulch development is minimal. Partly due to the lack of heavy sedimentation, which is harmful to water quality and marine biota, this portion of North Kohala contains crystal clear waters and a healthy marine ecosystem. In the Hawaiian Islands in general, precipitation that is not cycled into evapotranspiration or conducted through streams into the ocean percolates into the ground to collect in the aquifers under the island before slowly making its way to the sea. Water may be trapped between vertical confining layers such as dikes or perched above horizontal confining layers such as volcanic ash soil, forming high level aquifers. If water continues to diffuse through the layers of rock, sand, soil and gravel, it will reach sea level. Fresh water has a lower density than seawater and floats above the salt water-permeated rock in a body shaped much like a lens, most of which is located below sea level. Due to the difference in density, for every foot the lens extends above sea level it extends 40 feet below sea level, although the lower areas contain a zone of mixing. Basal water tables have inland gradients that can rise as much as four feet per mile in high rainfall areas. This fresh water is the source of most of the State's groundwater. A basal aquifer underlies the dry coastal areas of North Kohala, which, along with the Kohala and Kehena Ditches, has been the source of domestic and agricultural water in the dry end of Kohala. The Hawai'i Commission on Water Resource Management (CWRM) classifies aquifers at several geographic levels. North Kohala is within the Kohala Aquifer Sector Area, which has a sustainable 21 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment yield of groundwater of 154 million gallons per day (mgd). Rainfall is extremely variable throughout the sector area. Within the Kohala Aquifer Sector Area are three aquifer system areas. The most leeward and driest is the Mahukona Aquifer System Area, with a sustainable yield of 17 mgd. Sustainable yield is the maximum theoretical rate at which an aquifer can be pumped without exceeding its recharge capacity. Puakea Ranch is near the northern boundary of the Mahukona Aquifer System Area, which is separated from the Hawi Aquifer System Area to the north by the center of northwest rift zone of the Kohala Mountains. Kohala was systematically researched for water use, facilities and future demand as part of the Hawaii County Water Use and Development Plan Update in 2012 (County of Hawaii Department of Water Supply [DWS] 2012). The Kohala Aquifer Sector Area as a whole has 63 production wells, including 18 municipal, 1 domestic, 3 industrial, 33 irrigation and 8 categorized as "other"; however, only 5 wells reported pumpage. Most of these wells are tunnels or shafts. There are also 30 wells drilled and categorized as "unused." Most of the actual water use within the Mahukona Aquifer System Area is for agriculture and is based on high-elevation stream diversions. Review of water usage indicates that the high 12-month moving average of groundwater pumpage from wells is about 0.69 mgd, or 4.06% of sustainable yield. If all known installed wells were pumped at maximum capacity, a situation that never occurs in reality, they could still only pump 2.21 mgd , or 13% of sustainable yield. Impacts and Mitigation Measures The very minor nature of the Proposed Action, surrounding agricultural and residential uses, and the presumed depth to groundwater indicates little potential for pollution of surface waters and groundwater from construction or operation of the facilities. In order to minimize the potential for construction phase sedimentation and erosion, the contractor shall perform all earthwork and grading in conformance with Chapter 10, Erosion and Sediment Control, Hawai'i County Code. No impacts to stream banks or stream waters will occur as none are present A number of best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented for the Proposed Action by the contractor, which may include, but may not be limited to, the following: Minimization of soil loss and erosion by revegetation and stabilization of slopes and disturbed areas of soil, possibly using hydromulch, geotextiles, or binding substances, as soon as possible after working; Minimization of sediment loss by emplacement of structural controls possibly including silt fences, gravel bags, sediment ponds, check dams, and other barriers in order to retard and prevent the loss of sediment from the site; Minimizing disturbance of soil during periods of heavy rain; Phasing of the project in order to disturb a minimum necessary area of soil at a particular time; Application of protective covers to soil and material stockpiles; Construction and use of a stabilized construction vehicle entrance, with designated vehicle wash area that discharges to a sediment pond; Use of drip pans beneath vehicles not in use in order to trap vehicle fluids; Routine maintenance of BMPs by adequately trained personnel; 22 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Coordination of stormwater BMPs and wind erosion BMPs whenever possible; and Proper cleanup and disposal at an approved site of any significant leaks or spills. If grading for the Proposed Action will disturb more than one acre—a figure that currently appears unlikely—a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit would be needed before the construction commences. This permit requires the completion of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). In order to properly manage stormwater runoff, the SWPPP will describe the emplacement of a number of best management practices (BMPs) for the Proposed Action. These BMPs may include measure listed above and others that will be developed in coordination with the Department of Health. As discussed above, the owners may opt to satisfy some of the potable water demand by installing a well, and to supplement irrigation water with catchment. The well would be required to pump an average of approximately 20,000 gallons per day. 13ased on the presence of other wells in the leeward North Kohala, e.g. The Ranch at Puakea installed a private well less than 2000 feet away to augment its County water supply. The well is authorized up to 200,000 gallons of water per day. It can be expected that groundwater sufficient for the lower level of demand for the Puakea Guest Ranch would be present. The U.S. Geological Survey conducted a ground-water study with test-well drilling, aquifer tests, and numerical simulation to investigate basal ground-water availability in the adjacent Hawi Aquifer System Area to assist DWS in assessing well feasibility (Underwood et al 1995). Historical records indicate that as much as 14.2 mgd was pumped in the period from 1940 through 1961 to irrigate sugarcane. Water quality in the USGS study's drilled wells wa3 excellent: The quality of water in the basal aquifer was investigated by analyzing water samples from five of the eight test-well sites...for concentrations of common ions. Samples were analyzed at the U.S. Geological Survey Central Laboratory according to standard methods.... Results show that the groundwater in Kohala is typical of water from Hawaiian basalt aquifers.... Dissolved ion concentrations were low, with specific conductance values ranging from 165 to 245 uS/cm and chloride concentrations ranging from 19 to 36 mg/L....At three sites... water samples were also collected for analysis for 18 dissolved metals and as many as 79 organic compounds, including agricultural chemicals, volatile constituents of fuel, and solvents.... No dissolved metals or organic compounds were found at concentrations exceeding maximum contaminant levels.....lron and aluminum were the metals found in highest concentrations, as might be expected given their abundance in basalt. Iron and aluminum may also have been released into the water samples from the iron well casing, metal pump, and aluminum discharge line. The other metals were either not detected or detected at low except for barium) concentrations that are typical of ground water from basalt aquifers....Samples were free of significant anthropogenic organic compounds. The only organic compounds reported were from well A, where toluene and xylene were found at or near the level of detection (0.2 ug/L). This concentration is far below the USEPA limit of 1,000 ug/L.... . Given these low levels, it is possible that the presence of these compounds was the result of sample contamination during collection, false detection in the laboratory, 23 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment or possible local contamination of the water during well drilling. Further sampling at this location would be necessary to verify the existence of the compounds. Although it should be cautioned that Puakea Ranch's location within the Northwest Rift Zone of Kohala Volcano,just outside of the Hawi Aquifer System Area, might lead to somewhat different conditions, the groundwater hydrology is likely to be fairly similar, especially in terms of water quality. Based on water table heights northeast of the rift zone at similar altitudes, the elevation of the water table above sea level would be expected to be in the range of 4 to 6 feet, although it is unknown if this analogy can accurately be made here. The only way to determine if water of acceptable quantity and quality would actually be available would be to drill and test a well. If suitable, the level of demand would be trivial in the overall context of groundwater use. As current groundwater withdrawal within the Mahukona Aquifer System Area is less than 1.0 mgd, the sustainable yield of 17 mgd would not be approached with this small addition. In terms of cumulative impacts, the County of Hawai'i WUDP (County of Hawai'i DWS 2012) noted that if all properties zoned for agriculture were fully planted with irrigated crops, the sustainable yield would be at risk, this scenario is highly infeasible because pumping costs to high elevation land would make farming financially unsustainable, and the threat of exceeding or even remotely approaching the sustainable yield is not realistic, at least for the foreseeable future. It is recognized that water is a public trust resource. This applies to all water resources without exception. It is the duty of agencies to try to maintain waters in their natural state, protect water for use in drinking, maintain water for Native Hawaiian use, and protect reserved water pursuant to the water code. Applicants who wish to utilize water must show that: 1.There is no harm in fact, or 2.That any potential harm does not preclude a finding that the requested use is nevertheless reasonable and beneficial. Furthermore, the Special Permit applicant: 1.Is obligated to demonstrate affirmatively that the proposed use will not affect a protected use; 2.Must demonstrate the absence of a practicable alternative water source; and 3.If the impact is found to be reasonable and beneficial, then in light of the cumulative impact of existing and proposed diversions on trust purposes, must implement reasonable measures to mitigate this impact. The use of groundwater to operate the Guest Ranch, which will also help preserve the historic site as well as promote and maintain agriculture on the property, is a reasonable and beneficial use. The minimal scale of ground disturbance coupled with the nature of the proposed use will not produce any effects to surface or groundwater quality. The measures that the applicant proposes to be required as a condition of permits are both the maximum measures feasible and will effectively protect the water resources from harm. 24 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment 3.1.4 Flora, Fauna and Ecosystems A biological survey was conducted in 2018 by Ron Terry, Ph.D. As illustrated by photos in Figure 3, the property is covered by landscaped vegetation, pasture and weedy patches. No natural vegetation exists. All plant species observed in the survey are listed in Table 2 below. Only a few common native plants— the common roadside herb 'uhaloa (Waltheria indica), some planted specimens of hapu'u tree ferns (Cibotium glaucum), and the common morning glory (Ipomoea indica) — were noted on the property. No threatened or endangered plant species (USFWS 2018) are present or would be expected on the property. Furthermore, no plant critical habitat is present on or within three miles of the property, with the closest plant critical habitat above 2,000 feet in elevation in the Kohala Mountains. (https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html). Fauna The mammalian fauna of the project area is composed mainly of introduced species associated with ranches and farms, including domestic cattle, pigs, chickens and dogs. In addition, wild mammals include small Indian mongooses (Herpestes a. auropunctatus), feral cats (Felis cattus), roof rats (Rattus r. rattus), Norway rats (Rattus norvegicus), European house mice (Mus domesticus) and possibly Polynesian rats (Rattus exulans hawaiiensis). None of these mammals are of conservation concern and all are deleterious to native flora and fauna. All birds seen on the site during the biological reconnaissance were wide-ranging aliens such as common myna (Acridotheres tristis), house finch (Carpodacus mexicanus), cattle egret (Bubulcus ibis), spotted dove (Streptopelia chinensis), yellow-billed cardinal (Paroaria capitata), saffron finch Sicalis flaveola), gray francolin (Francolinus pondicerianus) and zebra dove (Geopelia striata). No birds indigenous to Hawai'i were identified during the survey. However, it is likely that the common migratory shorebird, Pacific golden-plover or kolea (Pluvialis fulva) is present during the winter on mown areas, as it commonly is throughout the State of Hawai'i. The occasional presence of the Hawaiian short eared owl (Alio flammeus sandwichensis) and Nene (Branta sandvicensis) have been reported. They are found in the majority of the island. There is no aspect of the project that would affect them in any adverse way. No critical habitat (https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html) for terrestrial fauna is present in the area, but some endangered spec es may overfly this and all other areas of the Island of Hawai'i. The Hawaiian petrel (Pterodroma sandwichensis), the Hawaiian sub-species of Newell's shearwater (Puffinus newelli), and the bEnd-rumped storm-petrel (Oceanodroma castro) have been recorded over-flying various areas on the Island of Hawai'i between late April and the middle of December each year. The Hawaiian petrel and band-rumped storm-petrel are listed as endangered, and Newell's shearwater as threatened, under both federal and State of Hawai'i endangered species statutes. These seabirds hunt over the ocean during the day and fly to higher elevations at night to roost and nest. The Hawaiian petrel and the band-rumped storm petrel are known to nest at elevations well above 5,000 feet on the Big Island, not within the project area. But during it breeding season from April through November, the Newell's shearwater burrows under ferns on forested mountain slopes. These burrows are used year after year and usually by the same pair of birds. Although capable of climbing shrubs and trees before taking flight, it needs 25 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment an open downhill flight path through which it can become airborne. Once abundant on all the main Hawaiian Islands, most Newell's shearwaters are today found in the steep terrain between 500 to 2,300 feet on Kaua'i (https://www.fws.gov/pacificislands/fauna/newellsshearwater.html). Table 2. Plant Species on Property Scientific Name Family Common Name Life Status Form Abrus precatorius Fabaceae Black-eyed Susan Vine A Abutilon grandifolium Malvaceae Hairy abutilon Herb A Acacia farnesiana Fabaceae Klu Shrub A Ageratum conyzoides Asteraceae Ageratum Herb A Artocarpus altilis Moraceae Breadfruit Tree A Asclepias physocarpa Apocynaceae Balloon Plant Herb A Furcraea foetida Agavaceae Agave Shrub A Aleurites moluccana Euphorbiaceae Kukui Tree A Amaranthus spinosus Amaranthaceae Spiny amaranth Herb A Antigonon leptopus Polygonaceae Mexican creeper Vine A Araucaria columnaris Araucariaceae Cook pine Tree A Bambusa vulgaris Poaceae Yellow clumping bamboo Tree A Bauhinia x blakeana Fabaceae Hong Kong orchid Tree A Bougainvillea sp.Nyctaginaceae Bougainvillea Shrub/ A Vine Breynia disticha Euphorbiaceae Snow bush Shrub A Calotropis gigantea Apocynaceae Crown flower Shrub A Carica papaya Caricaceae Papaya Tree A Casuarina equisetifolia Casuarinaceae Ironwood Tree A Catharanthus roseus Apocynaceae Madagascar periwinkle Shrub A Cenchrus ciliaris Poaceae Buffelgrass Grass A Cibotium glaucum Dicksoniaceae Hapu'u pulu Fern I Cenchrus setaceus Poaceae Fountain grass Grass A Cenchrus advena Poaceae Purple fountain grass Grass A Citrus sinensis Rutaceae Common orange Tree A Clusia rosea Clusiaceae Autograph tree Tree A Cocos nucifera Araceae Coconut Tree A Codiaeum variegatum Euphorbiaceae Croton Shrub A Colocasia esculenta Araceae Taro Shrub A Convolvulus arvensis Convolvulaceae Field bindweed Vine A Cordyline fruticosa Agavaceae Ti Shrub A Crinum sp. Amaryllidaceae Spider lily Herbs A Cynodon dactylon Poaceae Bermuda grass Grass A Delonix regia Fabaceae Royal poinciana Tree A Desmodium tortuosum Fabaceae Florida beggarweed Herb A Digitaria insularis Poaceae Sourgrass Herb A 26 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Table 2, continued Digitaria setigera Poaceae Itchy crabgrass Herb I? Dracaena marginata Agavaceae Money tree Tree A Dracaena massangeana Agavaceae Corn plan Tree A Eleusine indica Poaceae Goose grass Grass A Eragrostis tenella Poaceae Lovegrass Herb A Eriobotrya japonica Rosaceae Loquat Tree A Eucalyptus sp. Myrtaceae Eucalyptus Tree A Ficus macrophylla Moraceae Moreton Bay fig Tree A Ficus microcarpa Moraceae Chnese banyan Tree A Ficus religiosa Moraceae Bo tree Tree A Neonotonia wightii Fabaceae Glycine Herb A Gardenia taitensis Rubiaceae Tiare Shrub A Grevillea robusta Proteaceae Silver oak Tree A Hibiscus spp. Malvaceae Ornamental hibiscus (var.) Shrub A Hylocereus undatus Cactaceae Night blooming cereus Shrub A Ipomea indica Convolvulaceae Morning glory Vine I Jacaranda mimosifolia Bignoniaceae Jacaranda Tree A Jatropha integerrima Euphorbiaceae Peregrina Tree A Kalanchoe tubiflora Crassulaceae Chandelier plant Herb A Lantana camara Verbenaceae Lantana Shrub A Leonotis nepetifolia Lamiaceae Lion's ear Herb A Leucaena leucocephala Fabaceae Haole koa Tree A Litchi chinensis Sapindaceae Lychee Tree A Livistona chinensis Arecaceae Chinese fan palm Tree A Macadamia integrifolia Proteaceae Macadamia Tree A Malva parviflora Malvaceae Cheeseweed Herb A Malvastrum Malvaceae False mallow Herb A coromandelianum Mangifera indica Anacardiaceae Mango Tree A Melia azedarach Meliaceae Chinaberry Tree A Monstera deliciosa Araceae Monstera Vine A Morus alba Moraceae White mulberry Tree A Murraya paniculata Rutaceae Mock orange Shrub A Musa sp. Musaceae Ornamental banana Shrub A Musa x paradisiaca Musaceae Banana Shrub A Nephrolepis multiflora Lomariopsidacea Sword fern Fern A Nerium oleander Apocynaceae Oleander Tree A 27 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Table 2, continued Opuntia ficus-indica Cactaceae Prickly pear Shrub A Pachira aquatica Bombaceae Malabar chestnut Shrub A Panicum maximum Poaceae Guinea grass Grass A Passiflora edulis Passifloraceae Lilikoi Vine A Persea americana Lauraceae Avocado Tree A Philodendron sp.Araceae Philodendron Vine A Phymatosorus grossus Polypodiaceae Maile Scented Fern, Lau'ae Fern A Plumbago auriculata Plumbaginaceae Leadwort Shrub A Plumeria sp. Apocynaceae Plumeria Shrub A Portulaca oleracea Portulacaceae Pig weed Herb A Prosopis pallida Fabaceae Keawe Tree A Saccharum officinarum Poaceae Sugar cane Herb A Samanea saman Fabaceae Monkeypod Tree A Sansevieria trifasciata Agavaceae Mother-in-law's tongue Shrub A Schefflera actinophylla Araliaceae Octopus tree Tree A Schinus terebinthifolius Anacardiaceae Christmas-berry Shrub A Sida rhombifolia Malvaceae Broom weed Herb A Synedrella nodiflora Asteraceae Node weed Herb A Syzygium cumini Myrtaceae Java plum Tree A Thevetia peruviana Apocynaceae Be-still tree Tree A Tradescantia spathacea Commelinaceae Oyster plant Herb A Waitheria indica Malvaceae Uhaloa Herb I A= alien; I = indigenous; E= endemic The primary cause of mortality for all three species in Hawai'i is thought to be predation by alien mammalian species at the nesting colonies. Collision with man-made structures is another significant cause. Nocturnally flying seabirds, especially fledglings on their way to the sea in the summer and fall, can become disoriented by exterior lighting. Disoriented seabirds may collide with manmade structures and, if not killed outright, become easy targets of predatory mammals. These listed seabirds would not directly utilize the property but could occasionally overfly it. The only native Hawaiian land mammal, the Hawaiian hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus semotus), also occurs in the project area, and indeed has been observed in almost all parts of the island of Hawai'i. With the abundant tree and shrub cover arranged in small copses and hedgerows, it is highly likely that bats utilize the area for feeding and perhaps roosting habitat. Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Terrestrial Biology Considering the existing environment with no natural vegetation and the minor nature of planned improvements to the flora, the Guest Ranch will produce almost no impacts to any species of flora and fauna other than the alien species already present. 28 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment To minimize impacts to the endangered Hawaiian hoary bat during vegetation removal associated with the Proposed Action, the owners will refrain from cutting trees or shrubs taller than 15 feet from June 1 to September 15 each year. This period is the most vulnerable time in the bat birthing and pup rearing season, and refraining from vegetation removal or trimming is recognized as appropriate by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in recent Endangered Species Act consultations. Outdoor lighting can attract threatened or endangered seabirds, which may become disoriented by the lighting, resulting in downed birds. To avoid the potential downing of these seabirds their interaction with outdoor lighting, no construction or unshielded equipment maintenance lighting will be permitted after dark between the months Df April and October. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County of Hawaii Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9, Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. Current lighting is dark sky friendly. The cottages have shielded porch lights. Cafe lighting is strung up underneath tents when erected. Walkways incorporate solar ground lights. 3.1.5 Air Quality, Noise, and Scenic Resources Environmental Setting Over the last thirty years, there has been periodic air pollution in Northwest Hawai'i from volcanic emissions of sulfur dioxide from Kilauea, which convert into particulate sulfate and produce a volcanic haze (vog). Vog has persistently blanketed North and South Kona, at least until the cessation (perhaps temporary) of volcanic activity on Kilauea in August 2018. However, air quality in North Kohala has been generally good, with the most noticeable degradation occurring as occasional southerly winds carry vog into the ares. Noise on the property is usually low and is derived principally from vehicles on the adjacent Akoni Pule Highway, as well as activities on the ranch and adjacent properties. According to the County of Hawai'i General Plan: The natural beauty of the leeward area of North Kohala is characterized by undulating hills and gullies. The arid landform slopes gently from the eroded higher elevations of the North Kohala Mountains to the sheltered coastal waters. The shallow soil cover and grasslands are cut by numerous gullies which empty storm waters into embayments along the coast. Akoni Pule highway bisects the area along the lover elevation and provides distant views to both the coast and uplands (County of Hawai'i Planning Department 2005: 7-9 to 7-10). No specifically cited examples of natural beauty or Exceptional Trees are present on or near the property. The lower portions of the property and Akoni Pule highway are inter-visible, but vegetation and topography combine to conceal most of the buildings from view. Scenic views to the Kohala Mountains are not affected by any structures on the property. The scenic setting of the property derives mainly from the landscape of historic cottages and gardens (see Figure 3) rather 29 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment than vistas of other areas, although there is a mid-distance view of the ocean (but not the shoreline) from many areas of the property. Impacts and Mitigation Measures The Guest Ranch would not be expected to have more than a negligible impact on air quality or greenhouse gas emissions during the minor scale of construction or during operation. Dust is an occasional nuisance here and in any other windy area of the drier parts of North Kohala, but the Guest Ranch would not produce any greater impacts than those associated with normal ranching activities, and usually considerably less. In terms of scenic impacts, there will be little change to the appearance of the property from any public vantage point, and no adverse impacts on view planes or scenic sites protected by County plans. Any construction in the event area will include light grading, trenching and frame construction involving small-scale heavy equipment, compressors, and power tools. These activities have the potential to generate noise exceeding 95 decibels at times, impacting nearby sensitive noise receptors on the margins of the development. Most construction will occur several hundred feet from the property boundaries. No sensitive noise receptors such as homes, parks or schools are present within 750 feet; only two homes outside the property are within 1,000 feet. In the State of Hawai'i, whenever construction noise is expected to exceed the DOH's "maximum permissible" property-line noise levels, contractors are required to consult with DOH per Title 11, Chapter 46, HAR (Community Noise Control) prior to construction. DOH then reviews the proposed activity, location, equipment, project purpose and timetable in order to decide whether a permit is necessary and what conditions and mitigation measures, such as restriction of equipment type, maintenance requirements, restricted hours, and portable noise barriers, will be necessary. It is proposed that the contractor be required as part of Special Permit conditions to consult with the DOH prior to the start of construction to determine whether mitigation would be required. On a permanent basis, future legal uses of the property as a Guest Ranch will generate some level of noise, particularly during large events. Excessive noise for past events has been cited by some neighbors as a concern. The owners have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action by relocating certain features and proposing time restrictions. As discussed in Section 1.1., the maximum number of persons on property at any given time for guest events will be limited to 100 outside guests (with two events a year at 350 people). Events with more than 38 attendees will be limited to Friday, Saturday and Sunday. Event hours will be limited to 9am-8pm Sunday-Thursday) and 9am-10pm (Friday and Saturday). The current no-noise policy after 10pm will continue. Additionally, extensive landscape mitigation plantings are central to the development of the designated area to block both noise and views to the area from surrounding properties. Noise may be defined as unwanted sound. Evaluation of noise requires a consideration of loudness at various pitches. Loudness is measured in units called decibels (dB). Since the human ear does not perceive all pitches or frequencies equally, noise levels are adjusted (or weighted) to correspond to human hearing. This adjustment is known as the A-weighted scale, abbreviated dBA. 30 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment In general, levels over 70 dBA are considered unpleasant by most individuals; levels under 50 dBA are generally perceived as acceptably quiet. For the average person, levels in life are usually somewhere in between. Any amplification devices will be restricted to State standards for residential uses at all property lines. Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control" establishes maximum permissible sound levels in dBA according to zoning districts. Residentially zoned land is considered Class A as provided in section 11-46-3. Class A requires the lowest maximum permissible sound levels, 55 dBA. For comparison, Agriculturally zoned land is considered Class C and allows for the highest maximum permissible sound levels, 70 dBA. Noise levels decline with distance in a predictable way. For example, the typical range of voice levels runs from 70 - 88 dBA (normal to shouting) measured within one foot. It is important to note that for every doubling of the distance from the noise source the sound pressure level decreases 6 decibels. Accordingly the 88 dBA voice level will decrease to 54 dBA if measured only 48 feet from the noise source. The event area will be 200 feet from the nearest property boundary line. Therefore it is expected that if measured the anticipated noise levels at the nearest boundary would be below the property line limits established. Considering this, the proposed use should not generate noise in excess of levels that would be expected from normal agricultural and ranching operations that otherwise would occur on the property. It should be noted that if the proposed Guest Ranch is not implemented, normal agricultural activities that could be conducted on the property could generate substantial noise. DOH noise limits stated in HAR 11-46 notwithstanding, the Right to Farm Act statute of the State of Hawaii (HRS 165-1 to 6) permits bona fide agricultural operations to proceed even when they produce noise. The statute, one of 50 that exists in all 50 states, protects farms using commonly accepted agricultural practices from being considered a nuisance in agriculturally zoned areas. This act is seen by state legislatures as critical for our ration's ability to protect its own food, fuel and fiber production. HRS Chapter 165-4 states that "No court, official, public servant, or public employee shall declare any farming operation a nuisance for any reason if the farming operation has been conducted in a manner consistent with generally accepted agricultural and management practices. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that a farming operation does not constitute a nuisance." Although Puakea Ranch's current agricultural operations produce minimal noise, future uses by this or other owners could very well produce noise considerably in excess of those allowed and regulated in a Guest Ranch. If noise does become a concern, the owners have pledged to work cooperatively with neighbors to find ways to reduce it. 3.1.6 Hazardous Materials, Toxic Substances and Hazardous Conditions Environmental Setting, Impacts and Mitigation Measures No Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was performed for the site, as there was no indication that hazardous materials or toxic substances are or were present on the property. No conditions or activities that would lead to such site contamination are known to be present or are expected to be present on the property. The property does not contain quarries, former explosives sites, or other 31 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment hazardous conditions. The property does not appear to have undergone any land use in modern times that would appear to have left the potential for any substantial contamination. State databases did not indicate any Underground Storage Tanks (USTs), Leaking Underground Storage Tanks (LUSTs), or records of incidents or releases on the site or in the surrounding properties https://eha-cloud.doh.hawaii.gov/iheer/#!/viewer). Although it is unlikely that any potentially hazardous, toxic or radioactive waste would be found on the property, precautions will be undertaken by contractors in the context of the project construction Best Management Practices for the appropriate response and remediation should any such hazardous, toxic, or radioactive material be encountered during the construction phase of the Proposed Action. 3.2 Socioeconomic and Cultural 3.2.1 Socioeconomic Characteristics Existing Environment The Proposed Action would affect generally the District of North Kohala and most directly the neighborhood of large agricultural lots that surrounds the property. Table 3 provides information on the socioeconomic characteristics of this part of North Kohala, along with those of County of Hawai'i as a whole for comparison, from the 2010 U.S. Census of Population. Impacts and Mitigation The maintenance of Puakea Ranch has many positive impacts for the North Kohala community in the form of a venue for community events and a source of jobs and civic pride in the historic preservation. At the same time, several neighbors who have built homes in and near the subdivision on lots ranging from 14 to 30 acres have voiced complaints about existing activities and concerns about continued activities and expansion. The concerns appear to be primarily related to noise, as discussed above, but fire hazard, strangers in the neighborhood, traffic and incompatibility with agriculture have also been raised. Table 3. Selected Socioeconomic Characteristics CHARACTERISTIC Hawaii Island North Kohala Total Population 187,044 6,579 Percent White 33.0% 19.5% Percent Asian 17.1% 17.1% Percent Hawaiian or Pacific Islander 12.5% 12.5% Percent Two or More Races 28.9% 48.7% 32 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Table 3, continued Median Age (Years) 40.7 38.2 Percent Under 18 Years 22.5% 18.0% Percent 65 Years and Over 15.4% 16.2% Percent Households with Children 25.5% 29.0% Average Household Size 2.83 3.34 Percent Housing Vacant 22.0% 20.8% Percent Over 16 Years in Labor Force 61.2% 62.1% Median Household Income 51,520 58,673 Percent Below Poverty Level 18.3% 18.1% Percent 25 years and older with High School DegrEe 91.0% 93.3% Percent with Disability 13.5% 12.6% Percent Foreign Born 12.7% 8.06% Source: U.S.Census Bureau American Fact Finder: http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml As discussed in Section 1.1., the owners have attempted to address noise concerns through a re-design of Guest Ranch facilities and activities plus restrictions on the scale and timing of various activities. These should combine to reduce noise impacts at the property line to levels permissible in residential districts, which are much stricter than applicable agricultural standards that would apply for land use as a ranch or farm. Generally speaking, agricultural activities are often as noisy or noisier than day-to-day Guest Ranch uses and occasional larger events, and that on many farms and ranches, ranch noise is also often accompanied by dust and odors, not to mention heavy and frequent use of pesticides and other chemicals. As a use, the Guest Ranch may be seen as not heavily impactful on social conditions in North Kohala, and brings along with it many community side-benefits, such as jobs, income, tax revenues, and a unique venue for community events. 3.2.2 Cultural Resources To accompany this EA, Haun and Associates conducted a cultural impact assessment (CIA) of the operations of the Guest Ranch, focused specifically on the 14.92 acres of the property that would be used for that purpose. The objective of the assessment was to identify any culturally significant resources or traditional cultural practices that occur within the property and its immediate vicinity. The assessment utilized archival research with historical documents, previous archaeology studies, previous cultural impact assessment reports, and oral interviews. The CIA is included in this EA as Appendix 2 and provides a wealth of information on the history of Puakea Ranch and related topics for interested readers. The summary contained in this section touches on the pre-Western agriculture context of the property, the transformation to agricultural and ranching uses, the 33 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment question of ongoing cultural resources and practices, and the potential to impact such resources by operating a Guest Ranch. Scholarly references have been mostly omitted in this section; they may be found in Appendix 2. Cultural and Historical Background The property is in the ahupua'a of Puakea in the district of North Kohala. The concept of the ahupua'a was established in Hawai'i during the 15th century, adding a new component to what was already a well-stratified society.Ahupua'a were usually wedge or pie-shaped, encompassing all of the eco-zones from the mountains to the sea and extending several hundred yards beyond the shoreline, assuring a diverse subsistence resource base.This land unit became the equivalent of a local community, with its own social, economic and political significance. The ahupua'a of Puakea originates at the shoreline between Puakea Point and Hianaula Point and extends inland 2.5 miles to approximately 1,240 feet elevation. It is bordered on the north by Honoipu Ahupua'a and on the south by Kukuipahu Ahupua'a. Puakea is literally translated as "white blossom" (Pukui, Elbert and Mookini 1976: 191). According to the model developed by Kirch (1985) and later revised in terms of initial settlement date (Kirch 2011), the Settlement or Colonization period of Hawai'i was around A.D. 1000, with colonists possibly from the southern Marquesas Islands. Early Hawaiian farmers developed new subsistence strategies during this period, adapting familiar patterns and traditional tools for use in their new environment. Order was kept through adherence to their ancient and ingrained philosophy of life and through the principle of genealogical seniority. According to Fornander 1969), Hawaiians brought from their homeland a variety of Polynesian customs including the major gods of Kane, Ku and Lono; the kapu system of law and order; pu'uhonua or places of refuge or asylum; the 'aumakua concept of a family or ancestral spirit and the concept of mana, or spiritual power. The Development Period, which lasted from A.D. 1100-1350, brought changes that included an evolution of traditional tools as well as some distinctly Hawaiian inventions. The evolution of the adze was an example of the former, while the latter included the two-piece fishhook and the octopus-lure breadloaf sinker. Another invention was the lei niho palaoa, an item worn by those of high rank which represented a trend toward greater status differentiation. The Expansion Period from A.D. 1350 to 1650 saw an increase in social stratification and major socioeconomic changes. It also was a time of expansive settling, with the development of the most favorable windward areas as well as more marginal areas on the island's leeward side. This was the time of the greatest population growth as large irrigated field systems were developed and expanded into more arid areas. Loko or fishpond aquaculture also flourished during this period. The second major migration to Hawai'i also occurred during the Expansion Period, with the settlers for this expansion coming from Tahiti in the Society Islands. An increase in war marked the Proto-Historic Period (A.D. 1650-1795), both locally and between islands. According to the National Park Service website, Mo'okini Heiau, located about two miles to the north, is one of the first luakini or sacrificial heiau in the Hawaiian Islands. It is described as follows: 34 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Tradition says that a temple was first built on the northernmost tip of the Island of Hawai'i sometime in the 5th century by the high priest Mo'okini. Later oral tradition says that the current heiau was built on the older temple between the 13th and 14th centuries by Pa'ao, a legendary priest from either Tahiti or Samoa who is said to have introduced the Hawaiians to human sacrifice, the walled heiau, and several types of kapu—the system of religious, political, and social laws that governed every aspect of daily life. Pa'ao was said to have lived near Mo'okini Heiau and founded a lineage of priests that served the ali'i 'ai moku paramount chief) of the Island of Hawai'i through the early part of the 19th century. Ancient Hawaiians had many types of heiau, each with their own distinct function and use by particular segments of society. Heiau ranged in size from single upright stones to massive and complex structures. Larger heiau were built by ali'i (chiefs), but the largest and most complex, the luakini heiau (sacrificial temple), could only be constructed and dedicated by an ali'i 'ai moku. Luakini heiau were reserved for rituals involving human or animal sacrifice and were generally dedicated to the war god Ku. Rituals performed at a luakini heiau highlighted the ali'i 'ai moku's spiritual, economic, political, and social control over his lands and his authority over the life and death of his people. Kohala, strategically located across an ocean channel from Maui, figures prominently in Hawaiian history. It is celebrated as the birthplace of Kamehameha I, who was born in the ahupua'a of Kokoiki. It has been said that when he was born, an army was assembling on the leeward Kohala coast, preparing for an attack on Maui, and his birth occurred on a night filled with rain, thunder and lightning. Also, at that time Maui chief Kekaulike was involved in a battle with Alapa'i of Kona. During the conflict, Kekaulike's men cut down trees in Kona and, according to Kamakau (1992), all the coconut trees in Kawaihae. According to Kamakau, he also "slaughtered the country people of Kohala" before seizing their possessions and returning to Maui, where he soon became ill and surrendered his power to Kamehamehanui. This period was one of continual war and strife. Ke'eaumoku set up a fort at Pololu and Honokane where he was attacked by Kalaniopu'u, and then relocated to Maui. Kalaniopu'u also conquered East Maui, defeating Kamehamehanui, who was Kekaulike's successor and also Kalaiopu'u's wife's brother. Kalaniopu'u appointed one of his chiefs, Puna, to be governor of Hana and Kipahulu. When Kamehamehanui died of illness in 1766, he was succeeded as Maui's king by Kahekili. At about that time, Ke'eamoku took Kamehamehanui's widow, Namahana, who was Kamehamehanui's cousin, as his wife. Their daughter, Ka'ahumanu, who would eventually become the favorite wife of Kamehameha I, was born in a cave at the base of Pu'u Kau'iki in 1768. In 1775, Kalaniopu'u and his forces from Hana overran the neighboring Kaupo district and raided Molokai, Lanai, Kaho'olawe and parts of West Magi. Kamehameha's efforts at the battle of Kalaeoka'ilio near Kaupo earned him recognition as a great warrior and the name of Pai'ea meaning hard-shelled crab) from Maui chiefs anc warriors. Ka'ahumanu and her parents left Maui for Hawai'i Island during the battles between Kalaniopu'u and Kahekili. In 1790 two Western ships, the Eleanora and Fair American, were trading in Hawaiian waters. As retribution for the theft of a skiff and the murder of one of the sailors, the crew of the Eleanora 35 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment massacred more than 100 natives at Olowalu, Maui. The Eleanora then sailed to Hawai'i Island, and one of its crew, John Young, went ashore, where he was detained by Kamehameha. The other vessel, the Fair American, was captured by the forces of Kamehameha off the Kekaha coast and its crew was killed except for one member, Isaac Davis. Kame'eiamoku, who resided in Ka'upulehu at the time, played a lead role in this incident. He and his followers recovered several foreign arms from the Fair American, including a cannon that they called "Lopaka", all of which were turned over to Kamehameha (Kamakau 1992). Kamehameha made Young and Davis his advisors. He also kept the vessel as part of his fleet. With the aid of his new advisors, new ship, and foreign arms Kamehameha conquered Maui. By 1796 he had conquered all the island kingdoms except Kaua'i. It wasn't until 1810, when Kaumuali'i of Kaua'i gave his allegiance to Kamehameha, that the Hawaiian Islands were unified under one ruler. Kawaihae eventually became one of the royal centers of the island at which Kamehameha resided, and one where he could make use of trade with foreign ships to acquire guns and ammunition. It was also the site of Pu'ukohola Heiau, dedicated to the war god Kuka'ilimoku, which Kamehameha built on the advice of a soothsayer. Subjects came from across Kamehameha's lands by the thousands to help him build the heiau. When it was completed in 1791, Kamehameha sent for Keoua, ruler of Ka'u, who was then killed and placed within the heiau, thus cementing Kamehameha's rule over Hawai`i Island. Following the death of Kamehameha I in 1819, the customary relaxing of kapu during mourning took place. But with the introduction of Christianity shortly thereafter, his successor, Kamehameha II, renounced the traditional religion and ordered that heiau structures either be destroyed or left to deteriorate. The family worship of 'aumakua images was allowed to continue. The Protestant missionaries who arrived from Boston in 1820 soon were rewarded with land and government positions, as many of the ali'i were eager to assimilate western-style dress and culture. But at the same time, the sandalwood trade was becoming a heavier burden on commoners, who bore the price in labor for the first Hawaiian national debt, as promissory notes and levies granted by American traders were enforced by American warships. In the 1820s, the sandalwood trade was at its peak and every tree found was cut for its value. The forests of Kohala, which reached almost to the Kawaihae shore as late as 1815, contained an abundance of the coveted wood. The assimilation of Western ways continued with the short-lived whaling industry and later commercial sugarcane, which was more lucrative but carried a heavy environmental price. The Mahele 'Aina that took place in 1848 placed all land in Hawaii into three categories: Crown Lands, Government Lands and Konohiki Lands. Ownership rights were "subject to the rights of the native tenants," or those individuals who lived on the land and worked it for their subsistence and for their chiefs. The Waihona 'Aina (2000) Mahele Database, which is a compilation of data from the Indices of Awards (Indices 1929), the Native Register (NR n.d.), the Native Testimony (NT n.d.), Foreign Register (FR n.d.) and the Foreign Testimony (FT n.d.) provide information on the Land Commission Awards (LCA) during the Mahele. This database indicates that two claims were made in Puakea Ahupua'a. LCA 8746 was claimed by Keawe and LCA 8879B by Kamalamailalo. Only LCA 36 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment 8879B was subsequently awarded. The location of this LCA is not depicted on available tax maps of the area. LCA 8746 to Keawe describes an enclosed house lot with two houses, in the 'ill of Laleakone with two houses on it surrounded by public land. The land passed from Keohokalole to Kekuannui and from Kekuanui to Keawe. LCA 8879B to Kamalamailalo describes a fenced house lot with five houses, three of which he owned and two that were owned by his father, Kaulemamoku. The land was owned by Kamalamailalo since the t me of Kamehameha I. This kuleana was not located near the Puakea Ranch property. After centuries of traditional Hawaiian cultivation, Kohala transformed rapidly upon the arrival of American missionaries in the 1820s, installation o?:Western style land tenure in the 1850s and a subsequent succession of agricultural ventures. By 1858 at least 2,119 foreigners lived in Hawai'i. Many were merchants who traded and provided provisions, ranchers and missionaries, who lived in various locations throughout the islands. "Foreigners engaged in agricultural pursuits with the idea of reaping a profit from the land, in contrast with the Hawaiians, who carried on...subsistence agriculture" (Coulter 1971:11). In the 1860s, the LI. S. Civil War brought about a boost for the sugar industry in Hawaii as sugar plantations in the South were boycotted or destroyed. The missionary most associated with the northern part of Kohala, Elias Bond, began getting involved in the sugar business. In 1860, he partnered with his long-time acquaintance Samuel N. Castle in founding the Kohala Sugar Company on lands owned by Bond and his neighbor Dr. James Wight. The first crop of the Kohala Sugar Company was harvested in January 1865. Kohala's transition was a reflection of what was happening elsewhere in Hawai'i, as the sugar industry grew. The industry brought in tens of thousands of laborers from Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa to work on the many plantations and mills that were being established on all major islands. Puakea and the surrounding ahupua'a were divided into land grants in the 1850s. Most of the present property was part of a grant to a Henry Christenson, who soon also obtained adjacent land. He soon established a sheep ranch, which persisted, and tried sugarcane cultivation, which did not. Dr. James Wight, who landed in Kohala in 1840 and operated a drug store and served as a Circuit Judge between 1852 and 1863, purchased the lands around 1875. He succeeded in both sugarcane and ranching and also advanced to the House of Nobles under the Hawaiian Monarchy. Operating the ranch under a succession of managers, he raised as many as 7,000 head of sheep. Subject to disease and predation, sheep were discontinued after 1890 and the property along with thousands of adjacent acres became a cattle ranch. Beef had little value at this time and many cattle were sold as work oxen for the canefields. By 1901, Puakea Ranch held 3,000 cattle. Following Dr. Wight's death in 1905 at the age of 91, trustees operated the ranch, which had grown to 8,758 acres. To supply water for their operations, sugar planters constructed miles of ditches in the Kohala mountains. Ranchers also dug wells near the shore. Water supply at the end of the ditch at Puakea Ranch eventually became inadequate for successful sugarcane cultivation, and the last cane crop was harvested in 1930. On the ranching side, Puakea Ranch was amalgamated with Puuhue Ranch and grew to 25,000 acres. The manager's home at Puakea Ranch was considered to be a grand estate at this time and many parties and gatherings were hosted there, as "The Society" was a very important part of the predominantly British culture of North Kohala's sugar and mill owners. Prominent plantation families of the time including Mrs. & Mrs. H. R. Bryant, Mr. & Mrs. James S. Wight, Mr. Robert 37 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Leighton Hind and Mr. & Mrs. H.P. Woods were all residents of the estate home from at one time during 1870 to 1940. Beginning in 1928-1932, management of Puakea Ranch was controlled by John Hind, who was the president of the Puakea Plantation Company. Parker Ranch began leasing the Puakea Ranch lands from the James Wight Estate in 1932, and Richard Smart of Parker Ranch purchased its lands outright in 1944, until the headquarters area was sold in the 1980s. Like many landowners, Dr. Wight brought in laborers to work the land, contributing to a wave of 185,000 Japanese immigrants who came to Hawai'i in the 19th and 20th Centuries. Zenjiro Kawamoto and his wife Wasa Watabayashi came to North Kohala from Hiroshima as part of this migration. They settled at Puakea Ranch and moved into what would eventually be called the Cowboy House". The Kawamotos raised three children at the ranch: Masato (Johnny), Yoshio Yoshi), and Thelma. The family went on to oversee the operations of the Puakea Ranch for four generations. Cultural Resources and Practices The Constitution of the State of Hawai'i clearly states the duty of the State and its agencies to preserve, protect, and prevent interference with the traditional and customary rights of native Hawaiians. Article XII, Section 7 requires the State to "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 spite of the establishment of the foreign concept of private ownership and Western-style government, Kamehameha III (Kauikeaouli) preserved the people's traditional right to subsistence. As a result in 1850, the Hawaiian Government confirmed the traditional access rights to native Hawaiian ahupua'a tenants to gather specific natural resources for customary uses from undeveloped private property and waterways under the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) 7-1. In 1992, the State of Hawai'i Supreme Court reaffirmed HRS 7-1 and expanded it to include, "native Hawaiian rights...may extend beyond the ahupua'a in which a native Hawaiian resides where such rights have been customarily and traditionally exercised in this manner" (Pele Defense Fund v. Paty, 73 Haw.578, 1992). The duty of agencies when granting land use permits to identify valued natural, cultural and historical resources, assess impacts to them and devise feasible actions to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights was established by the Hawai'i Supreme Court in the case of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs. the Hawai'i State Land Use Commission (94 Hawai'i 31, 7 P.3d 106, 2000). To assist in consideration of cultural resources and their impacts during the EA/EIS process, the Hawaii State Office of Environmental Quality Control (OEQC) developed the Guidelines for Assessing Cultural Impacts (http://health.hawaii.gov/oeqc/). The types of cultural practices and beliefs subject to assessment may include subsistence, commercial, residential, agricultural, access-related, recreational, and religious and spiritual customs. A finding of a cultural impact assessment is to evaluate the probability of impacts on identified cultural resources, including values, rights, beliefs, objects, records, properties, and stories occurring within the project area and its vicinity. 38 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment The physical resources of the Puakea Ranch property, such as plants and water features, were assessed as part of the research for the EA. In general, it was observed that no culturally important native plants, springs, groves of native trees, or caves or pu'u, which may have cultural significance, are present on the property. In order to determine what cultural associations the property had beyond such physical features, and whether there were any ongoing cultural resources or practices, archival research was conducted at the -amilton Library Hawaii and Pacific Collection at the University of Hawai'i-Manoa, the University of Hawai'i-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, State Historic Preservation Division Library, State Survey Division, and the Hawai'i State Public Libraries in Honolulu and Hilo. Most importantly, informal talk story" interviews were conducted with knowledgeable individuals in a manner that allowed them to discuss the issues most important to then about the project area and the Proposed Action. The individuals who chose to participate in this CIA were residents of Kohala. A number of people were familiar with the property and its resources. Puakea Ranch and its vicinity were used by Parker Ranch for more than 70 years. Masa Kawamoto was born and raised on the ranch and would often help his mother as she worked around the ranch. He recalled that he would often go bird hunting with his brother to help his mother whenever the ranch owners would throw parties. Farming and bird hunting were traditional activities practiced by the local ranch families. Michael Gomes, a local historian and author, stated that the only activities that took place on Puakea Ranch were associated with cattle ranching. Those activities ceased at Puakea Ranch once Parker Ranch sold its Puakea holdings and the families were asked to leave. No individual identified any cultural resources or practices that would be affected by the Proposed Action. Based on all these sources, the CIA concluded that no traditional cultural resources, practices or properties were identified within the project area. and that the proposed usage of the property as a Guest Ranch would not have an adverse impact on any potential traditional cultural practices or properties located on or near the property. 3.2.3 Archaeological and Architectural Resources To accompany this EA, an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of the 2.14 acres within which ground disturbance would occur was prepared by Haun and Associates conducted in October 2018. The survey is included in Appendix 3 and briefly summarized here. As discussed previously, as part of historic preservation efforts, the owners recorded the Puakea Ranch headquarters in a June 2009 National Register of Historic Places form (NRHP), and the ranch buildings were subsequently assigned State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) number 50-10-02-9071. The portion of Site 9071 in the archaeological survey project area is associated with the historic use of the Puakea Ranch. The AIS identified within this 2.14-acre area three features (Features 7, 10.1 and 13) of this previously identified historic site. Appendix 3 contains photographs, measurements and other descriptions of these features. The features consist of a modern building built over a historic concrete slab (Feature 7), a section of the Feature 10 wall, designated as Feature 10.1, and a newly identified concrete slab that appears to be historic in origin. (Feature 13). The Feature 7 slab originally functioned as the foundation for a garage and has been repurposed for use as a tool shed. The Feature 10.1 wall is interpreted as a livestock control feature likely used to prevent livestock from entering habitation areas. The original function of the 39 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Feature 13 slab is unknown; however, it currently functions as the foundation for a chicken coop and farm stand. The portion of the site in the project area is altered and in fair condition. The portion of Site 9071 in the project area is unaltered and in fair condition. The previously prepared NRHP form indicates Site 9071 is assessed as significant under criterion "a" because of its association with events that made a contribution to the broad patterns of history (sugar cane cultivation and cattle ranching), under criterion "b" due to its association with Dr. James Wight, under criterion "c" as an excellent site type example, and under criterion "d" for its information content. Site 9071 was determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed development will have an effect on the historic properties within the project area. The landowners propose minimal impacts to the 2.14-acre project area, consisting of constructing an approximately 2500-square foot space that contains an Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) approved restroom, kitchen facility and a space for set up in an enclosed area. The majority of the area will not be impacted by the proposed development and will function as an open event area for weddings and other functions; however, the Feature 7 and 13 slabs will be destroyed to make way for the ADA improvements. The Feature 10.1 wall will be preserved. The Feature 7 and 13 slabs are not integral components of the Puakea Ranch and functioned as minor elements of the facility. In order to mitigate their destruction, the proposed restroom will be designed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for rehabilitation which is defined as "...the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architecture, and cultural value." (NPS.gov.) The restroom will be aesthetically compatible with the other historic structures on the property, constructed with board and batten siding and corrugated metal roofing. The restroom will be constructed in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the remaining historic properties and its environment would be unimpaired. 3.3 Infrastructure 3.3.1 Utilities, Energy, Public Facilities and Public Services Existing Utilities, Impacts and Mitigation Measures Electrical power is already supplied to Puakea Ranch by Hawai'i Electric Light via its islandwide distribution network. Landline telephone service is also available from Hawaiian Telcom. There is photovoltaic (PV) solar power installed at Yoshi's House. The site has a shared County water meter and incorporates rainwater catchment for irrigation needs. According to a letter from the Department of Water Supply (DWS) of December 11, 2018 see Appendix la), there is only one master meter for the 9 lots within the Puakea Ranch subdivision (of which Puakea Ranch is just one lot), which has averaged 5,550 gallons per day. DWS stated that it cannot provide additional water at this time for any development requiring additional 40 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment water within the subdivision. Improvements to the system's source, booster pump, storage, distribution and/or transmission facilities would be required for DWS to agree to supply additional water. Based upon preliminary calculations, a conservative estimate for the average potable water demand for the proposed Guest Ranch is 5700 gallons per day (gpd). Accordingly, in order to accommodate additional water demand from the Guest Ranch, the owners tentatively propose to construct a water well for domestic uses. This well is expected to incorporate an approximately 5hp submersible pump with a capacity of 35 gallons per minute. The applicant anticipates that the well will be permitted to draw up to 20,000 gpd. Fire supply would be provided in a reserve tank with an approximate storage volume of 10,000 gallons. Then, too, the owners are also planning construction of a holding tank to supplement, as needed, the project's water needs. Additionally, in order to accommodate additional eater demand from the Guest Ranch, the owners propose to expand the catchment capacities. The current system is capable of collecting an annual average of approximately 100 gpd. This is generated mainly from roof catchment on Yoshi's House, stored in a 20,000 gallon tank. There is also a rain barrel used to store water collected from each of the four cottages' bath houses. Additional roofs can be included in the catchment system and designed to match the low-water demand of the natural/xerophytic landscaping and the farm garden needs. With expansion, the catchment capacity could reach 400 gpd. This additional catchment supply would be provided in a reserve tank with an approximate storage volume of 10,000 gallons. The site also is exploring access to water from the Kohala Ditch, however it is in no way being counted on. If available, this source would allow up to 2500 gpd, to be used for farming purposes. A property of this size is allowed multiple individual wastewater systems and is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive, with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface groundwater. The owners propose to construct a septic or enhanced septic system to address the majority of the wastewater requirements of the project. The primary wastewater needs will be for the proposed restrooms. The system will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health. In addition, portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent, large everts. This is an economical way to handle surge loads and ensure that the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use that may happen only once or twice a year. This is a common practice on island and there are several portable toilet providers to consistently obtain from, when needed. The provider selected will advise on the rental supply based upon the expected number of guests and the duration of the event. Typically only two to four portable toilets are required for the large events. Existing Public Services and Facilities and Impacts and Mitigation Measures Fire, police and emergency medical services are available at a full-time fire station and a police station in Kapa'au, located approximately 4 miles to the east. Acute medical care service is available at Kohala Hospital in Kapa'au and at North Hawaii Community Hospital located in Waimea, approximately 23 miles away. No substantial impacts upon these facilities would be expected from the addition of approximately 20 guests per day and periodic events. Solid waste 41 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment from the Guest Ranch will be hauled by Puakea Ranch staff or commercial disposal operators to the County's West Hawai'i Sanitary Landfill in Pu'uanahulu, which has several decades of capacity. Because of the nature of the Proposed Action increasing the value of the property and involving more guests and employees, real property, payroll, GET and TAT tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. 3.3.2 Roadways and Traffic Existing Facilities and Traffic Puakea Ranch takes access from a driveway off the east side of Akoni Pule Highway (State Highway 270) (see Figure 5), a facility under the control of the Hawai'i State Department of Transportation HDOT). The highway is signed for 55 MPH in the area. The west side of the intersection also accesses on the Puakea Bay subdivision, a private gated community with 42 lots. No intersection controls, turn lanes, storage lanes or acceleration lanes are present. With current low traffic levels and minimal peak hour use, there appears to be no traffic issues during normal operation. For an event with more than 100 people attending, professional traffic control is utilized to facilitate free flow of vehicle access through the project entrance. Any legal access rights shared through this entrance will not be hindered. Any additional costs for maintenance of the access will be covered based upon shared usage. Figure 5. Current Entrance of Puakea Ranch Property (Street View ©2018 Google) iia 5 42 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Impacts and Mitigation Measures The Proposed Action would increase traffic during normal operation by a factor of about two with a concomitant increase in employee and service trips. In a letter of January 7, 2019 (see Appendix la), the HDOT requested preparation of a Traffic Assessment by a licensed professional engineer to include trip generation, an evaluation of the project access, and recommend improvements as needed. Traffic Assessments are often conducted for projects to determine if the proposed action may produce significant traffic impacts. Section 25-2-4(5 (Concurrency Requirements), County of Hawai'i Zoning Code, for example, requires a traffic impact analysis report (TIAR) with the application for any zoning amendment which can generate 50 or more peak hour trips. To compare the scale of impacts of the minimum sized subdivision that triggers the need for a TIAR under the County Code, an engineer assessed the traffic generation characteristics of the Proposed Action. The trip generation methodology used is based upon applications developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) and published in "Trip Generation Manual", 9th Edition, 2012. Trip generations have been developed for a variety of land uses (or facility types) that correlate trips with dwelling units, area, population, vehicle ownership and intensity of use. Each facility type has a catalog Classification number for identification purposes. For any given classification, repeated field studies by the ITE measuring actual trips generated by different land uses has calculated a generator factor for peak hour trips. This factor is multiplied by the number of units in a land use This is further divided into trips that are entering or exiting the development, a split that differs by time of day. In this case, the published dataset does not have good data for the type of use anticipated. In order to approximate a Classification it was necessary to estimate daily trips based upon the expected staffing levels and the maximum attendance allowed by capacity. To increase the Guest Ranch to seven rental units, the guest traffic is expected to approximately increase by five round trips per day.The employee traffic would increase to be 10 round trips per day. This combined impact represents less than 1% of the current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. The large community events represent a greater Expected impact. These one-day events are to be limited to one or two per year. An event like this is expected to host up to eight vendor vehicles and approximately 88 attendee vehicles. These round trips focused on only one or two days per year only represent 3.5% of the current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. The relatively minor increase due to this project related traffic is not expected to have any significant impacts to Akoni Pule Highway due to the low volume of employees and guests that would access the site. The applicant believes that any potential for project-induced secondary effects on Route 270 traffic safety during hosted Events can be handled through the use of professional traffic control personnel on the very Few occasions where large numbers of vehicles are expected. If traffic issues attributable to the site operations are identified, the owners will mitigate the impact to the satisfaction of HDOT, Hawaii District Engineer. 43 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment 3.4 Secondary and Cumulative Impacts Distinct from the direct effects that construction and use of the Guest Ranch could have are secondary impacts. For example, one secondary impact from large hotels is often a substantial increase in visitors who can overrun visitor attractions and even invade formerly all-local areas. Although this can be said to be occurring on the Big Island, appreciable impacts to North Kohala from a maximum of additional twenty visitors per day on an island with about 40,000 daily visitors on any given day (http://dbedt.hawaii.gov/visitor/ni-stats/) can be discounted. Another potential secondary impact is economic; although generally positive, increased economic activity resulting from the expenditures of new residents can draw in workers who add to the existing demand for affordable housing. All current employees are local, and it is expected that the modest increase of five new jobs in the district's job count would not induce in-migration or require long commutes. In the case of the subject project, its modest scale in relation to the existing population of the island indicates that any such adverse secondary impacts would be negligible. Cumulative impacts result when implementation of several projects that individually have limited impacts combine to produce more severe impacts or conflicts in mitigation measures. As discussed elsewhere in this document, the only non-negligible impacts are reported nuisance impacts to immediate neighbors and minor traffic impacts. Because of the nature and scale of the action, there are no substantial impacts to water resources, biology, historic sites, cultural resources or practices, or other categories of impacts. It is therefore appropriate to frame the cumulative impact discussion the context of ongoing and future developments with the potential to produce impacts that are similar to those of the Proposed Action. The North Kohala District is primarily residential in nature, with some ongoing farming and ranching. Commercial activities bolstered by tourism occur in its two primary towns, Hawi and Kapa'au. North Kohala supported some of the earliest wind farms in Hawai'i and is being explored for biomass and green farming. Over the decades, several subdivisions have occurred, including Puakea Ranch and Puakea Bay, The Ranch at Puakea and additional subdivisions as well as resorts have been proposed, for example, at Mahukona. According to records of EAs and Special Management Area permits published by the OEQC Environmental Notice, there are no current residential, commercial, or industrial proposals in the area that would affect either traffic or immediate neighbor impacts. Based on the above, it appears that no adverse impacts from the Proposed Action have the potential to accumulate with those from other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future actions in such a way as to increase the severity or nature of impacts. 3.5 Required Permits and Approvals A County of Hawaii, Leeward Planning Commission, Special Permit will be required. If approved, the following permits and approvals would be required: County of Hawai'i, Department of Public Works, Engineering Division: Grading Permit, County of Hawai'i, Planning Department, Plan Approval (if required by the Special Permit), 44 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment County of Hawai'i, Department of Public Works, Building Division: Building Permit, Other permits and/or data required to comply with any conditions of approval of the Special Permit. 3.6 Consistency with Government Plans and Policies 3.6.1 Hawaii State Plan Adopted in 1978 and last revised in 1991 (Hawaii Revised Statutes, Chapter 226, as amended), the Plan establishes a set of themes, goals, objectives and policies that are meant to guide the State's long-run growth and development activities. The three themes that express the basic purpose of the Hawai'i State Plan are individual and family self-sufficiency, social and economic mobility and community or social well-being. The Proposed Action would promote these goals by allowing a land use that would take advantage of and help maintain a historic resource, provide employment, and continue and improve a venue for community events, while generating only negligible environmental impacts, thereby enhancing quality-of-life and community and social well-being. 3.6.2 Hawaii State Land Use Law All land in the State of Hawai'i is classified into on? of four land use categories— Urban, Rural, Agricultural, or Conservation — by the State Land Use Commission, pursuant to Chapter 205, HRS. The property is in the State Land Use Agricultural District. Only with the granting of a Special Permit by the County of Hawai'i Leeward Planning Commission would the Proposed Action be consistent with this classification. See Section 3.6.4 for a discussion of the criteria that will be considered as part of the Special Permit. 3.6.3 County of Hawai'i Zoning and General Plan County of Hawaii Zoning. The entire property carries a zoning designation of A-20a (Agricultural, 20-acre minimum lot size). With the granting of a Special Permit by the County of Hawai'i Leeward Planning Commission, the Proposed Action would be consistent with this classification. See Section 3.6.4 for a discussion of the Special Permit process and the criteria that will be considered. The County of Hawai'i General Plan Land Use Pattern Allocation Guide (LUPAG). The LUPAG map component of the General Plan is a graphic representation of the Plan's goals, policies, and standards as well as of the physical relationship between land uses. It also establishes the basic urban and non-urban form for areas within the planned public and cultural facilities, public utilities and safety features, and transportation corridors. The property, along with all surrounding property within a mile or more, is classified as Important Agricultural Lands in the LUPAG. Given the granting of a Special Permit by the County of Hawaii Leeward Planning Commission, the Proposed Action would be consistent with this classification. See Section 3.6.4 for a discussion of the criteria that will be considered as part of the Special Permit. The General Plan for the County of Hawaii is a policy document expressing the broad goals and policies for the long-range development of the Island of Hawai'i. The plan was adopted by 45 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment ordinance in 1989 and revised in 2005 (County of Hawai'i Planning Department). The General Plan itself is organized into thirteen elements, with policies, objectives, standards, and principles for each. There are also discussions of the specific applicability of each element to the nine judicial districts comprising the County of Hawai'i. Analysis for the EA confirms that it generally satisfies the following Goal and Policies, and Courses of Action of particular chapters of the General Plan: ECONOMIC GOALS a) Provide residents with opportunities to improve their quality of life through economic development that enhances the County's natural and social environments. b) Economic development and improvement shall be in balance with the physical, social, and cultural environments of the island of Hawaii. c) Strive for diversity and stability in the economic system. d) Provide an economic environment that allows new, expanded, or improved economic opportunities that are compatible with the County's cultural, natural and social environment. Discussion:The Proposed Action is in balance with the natural, cultural and social environment of the County, and it will create temporary construction jobs and permanent Guest Ranch jobs for local residents and indirectly affect the economy through purchases of materials and supplies for the Guest Ranch and secondarily through employee purchases. A multiplier effect takes place when these employees spend their income for food, housing, and other living expenses in the retail sector of the economy. Such activities are in keeping with the overall economic development of the island. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY GOALS a) Define the most desirable use of land within the County that achieves an ecological balance providing residents and visitors the quality of life and an environment in which the natural resources of the island are viable and sustainable. b) Maintain and, if feasible, improve the existing environmental quality of the island. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY POLICIES a) Take positive action to further maintain the quality of the environment. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY STANDARDS a) Pollution shall be prevented, abated, and controlled at levels that will protect and preserve the public health and well being, through the enforcement of appropriate Federal, State and County standards. b) Incorporate environmental quality controls either as standards in appropriate ordinances or as conditions of approval. Discussion: The Proposed Action would not have a substantial adverse effect on the environment and would not diminish the valuable natural resources of the region. The Proposed Action will 46 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment obtain permits and follow the conditions designed to reduce or eliminate pollution and environmental degradation.The Guest Ranch would assist in maintaining agricultural uses on the property by subsidizing them and providing a built-in market for garden and farm produce. HISTORIC SITES GOALS a) Protect, restore, and enhance the sites, buildings, and objects of significant historical and cultural importance to Hawaii. b) Appropriate access to significant historic sites, buildings, and objects of public interest should be made available. HISTORIC SITES POLICIES a) Agencies and organizations, either public or private, pursuing knowledge about historic sites should keep the public apprised of projects. b) Require both public and private developers of land to provide historical and archaeological surveys and cultural assessments, where appropriate, prior to the clearing or development of land when there are indications that the land under consideration has historical significance. c) Public access to significant historic sites and objects shall be acquired, where appropriate. d) Encourage the restoration of significant sites on private lands. Discussion: Archaeological resources in the area to be affected by construction have been properly assessed through an inventory survey prepared by Haun and Associates conducted in October, 2018.The survey is included in Appendix 3. The current owners of Puakea Ranch placed the entire property on the State Historic Register as one step in preserving the integrity and significance of the architectural features of the ranch. All new construction will undergo review by SHPD to ensure consistency with the appropriate Secretary of the Interior's Standards for Treatment of Historic Properties. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE GOALS a) Conserve scenic and natural resources. b) Protect human life. c) Prevent damage to manmade improvements. d) Control pollution. e) Prevent damage from inundation. f) Reduce surface water and sediment runoff FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE POLICIES a) Enact restrictive land use and building structure regulations in areas vulnerable to severe damage due to the impact of wave action. Only uses that cannot be located elsewhere due to public necessity and character, such as maritime activities and the necessary public facilities and utilities, shall be allowed in these areas. 47 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment b) Development-generated runoff shall be disposed of in a manner acceptable to the Department of Public Works in compliance with all State and Federal laws. FLOOD CONTROL AND DRAINAGE STANDARDS a) Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 27, "Flood Control," of the Hawaii County Code. b) Applicable standards and regulations of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). c) Applicable standards and regulations of Chapter 10, "Erosion and Sedimentation Control" of the Hawaii County Code. d) Applicable standards and regulations of the Natural Resources Conservation Service and the Soil and Water Conservation Districts. Discussion: The property lies entirely within Zone X, outside the 500-year flood zone, and involves minimal ground disturbance. All standards regarding drainage, flooding and sedimentation will be adhered to and project design will be reviewed by and subject to permits from the County of Hawai'i Department of Public Works and the Hawai`i State Department of Health. NATURAL BEAUTY GOALS a) Protect, preserve and enhance the quality of areas endowed with natural beauty, including the quality of coastal scenic resources. b) Protect scenic vistas and view planes from becoming obstructed. c) Maximize opportunities for present and future generations to appreciate and enjoy natural and scenic beauty. NATURAL BEAUTY POLICIES a) Increase public pedestrian access opportunities to scenic places and vistas. b) Protect the views of areas endowed with natural beauty by carefully considering the effects of proposed construction during all land use reviews. c) Do not allow incompatible construction in areas of natural beauty. Discussion: The Proposed Action would have no adverse effect of scenic sites or view planes. NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES GOALS a) Protect and conserve the natural resources of the County of Hawaii from undue exploitation, encroachment and damage. b) Provide opportunities for the public to fulfill recreational, economic, and educational needs without despoiling or endangering natural resources. c) Protect and promote the prudent use of Hawaii's unique, fragile, and significant environmental and natural resources. d) Ensure that alterations to existing landforms and vegetation, except crops, and construction of structures cause minimum adverse effect to water resources, and scenic and recreational 48 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment amenities and minimum danger of floods, landslides, erosion, siltation, or failure in the event of an earthquake. NATURAL RESOURCES AND SHORELINES POLICIES a) The County of Hawaii should require users of natural resources to conduct their activities in a manner that avoids or minimizes adverse effects on the environment. b) Encourage the use of native plants for screening and landscaping. Discussion:The Proposed Action, which would occur more than a mile from the coast, has no effect on natural resources or shorelines. Impacts to existing natural landforms will not occur due to the minor nature of the Proposed Action's ground disturbance. Landscaping will match the existing historic character of the property. LAND USE GOALS a) Designate and allocate land uses in appropriate proportions and mix and in keeping with the social, cultural, and physical environments of the County. LAND USE POLICIES a) Allocate appropriate requested zoning in accordance with the existing or projected needs of neighborhood, community, region and County. LAND USE, OPEN SPACE GOALS a) Provide and protect open space for the social, environmental, and economic well-being of the County of Hawaii and its residents. b) Protect designated natural areas. LAND USE, OPEN SPACE POLICIES a) Open space shall reflect and be in keeping with the goals, policies, and standards set forth in the other elements of the General Plan. Discussion: The Proposed Action takes place on a historic property already occupied by ranch buildings and will have not effect open space. LAND USE, AGRICULTURE, GOALS a) Identify, protect and maintain important agriculture lands on the island of Hawaii. b) Preserve the agricultural character of the island. c) Preserve and enhance opportunities for the expansion of Hawaii's Agricultural Industry. LAND USE, AGRICULTURE , POLICIES 49 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment a) Agricultural land may be used as one form of open space or as green belt. b) In order to minimize the potential conflicts between agricultural and non-agricultural uses, standards and guidelines for the establishment of well defined buffer areas as part of new, non-agricultural developments that are located adjacent to important agricultural lands shall be developed. c) Designate, protect and maintain important agricultural lands from urban encroachment. d) Ensure that development of important agricultural land be primarily for agricultural use. e) Investigate possibilities to prevent non-agricultural uses that could interfere with potential or existing agricultural activities on important agricultural lands. f) Support efforts to provide tax relief and other incentives to enhance competitive capabilities of commercial farms and ranches, thereby ensuring long-term preservation, enhancement, and expansion of viable agricultural lands. g) Encourage, where appropriate, the establishment of visitor-related uses and facilities that directly promote the agriculture industry. h) Encourage other compatible economic uses that complement existing agricultural and pastoral activities. Discussion: The Proposed Action would occur on agriculturally zoned land in an area designated by the LUPAG as Important Agricultural Land. The owners have carefully considered the interaction of the Guest Ranch activities with agriculture and has designed a project that will promote current and future agricultural uses of the property rather than detract from them. Currently, Puakea Ranch guests eat from a large garden and orchards growing lavender, pineapple, lilikoi and dragon fruit as well as other boutique crops. The Proposed Action will not have an adverse effect on the agricultural utility of the property and its function as a green belt. 3.6.4 Special Permit Criteria Consistency In order to implement the Proposed Action, a Special Permit from the County of Hawai'i Leeward Planning Commission will be required, because the use as a Guest Ranch is not permitted outright within the State Land Use Agricultural District without such a permit. At the appropriate time after fulfilling the requirements of Chapter 343, the owners intend to file an application. The discussion of the environmental resources and impacts contained in this EA will be relevant for the application and its consideration by the Planning Commission. The process involves notification of neighbors and consideration at a public hearing. The Commission will take testimony on and consider and decide upon other issues, including the following: Surrounding Properties. The desired use shall not adversely affect the surrounding properties. Impact on Public Agencies. Such use shall not unreasonably burden public agencies to provide roads and streets, sewers, water, drainage, school improvements, and police and fire protection. District Boundaries, Regulations. Unusual conditions, trends, and needs have arisen since the district boundaries and regulations were established. Permitted Use. The land upon which the proposed use is sought is unsuited for the uses permitted within the district 50 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Character and Use of the Land. The proposed use will not substantially alter or change the essential character of the land and the present use. General Plan Compatibility. The proposed use will not be contrary to the goals, policies and standards of the General Plan and other applicable documents such as community development plans and design plans. Use of the Land. The proposed use is an unusual and reasonable use of land, which would not be contrary to the objectives to be sought by the Land Use Law and Regulations, which, for the Agricultural and Rural Districts, seeks to preserve or keep lands of high agricultural potential in agricultural use. The Proposed Action is consistent with the above criteria and merits a Special Permit. 3.6.5 North Kohala Community Development Plan The North Kohala Community Development Plan encompasses the judicial district of North Kohala and was developed under the framework of the February 2005 County of Hawaii General Plan. Community Development Plans are intended to translate broad General Plan Goals, Policies, and Standards into implementation actions as they apply to specific geographical regions around the County. CDPs are also intended to serve as a forum for community input into land-use, delivery of government services and any other matters relating to the planning area. The General Plan now requires that a Community Development Plan shall be adopted by the County Council as an ordinance," giving the CDP the force of law. This is in contrast to plans created over past years, adopted by "resolution" that served only as guidelines or reference documents to decision-makers. In November 2008, the North Kohala CDP was adopted by the County Council. The purposes of the North Kohala CDP are to: Articulate North Kohala's residents' Vision and Values for their Community Identify North Kohala's residents' Priority Issues to be addressed by the CDP Develop Strategies and Action Programs to address those Priority Issues The CDP, with a theme of"Keep Kohala, Kohala," describes the district as a "Cultural and Historical Preservation Community" and emphasizes that all development decisions "shall be required to assess and disclose their potential impact on cultural sites and resources within the district, and shall be in keeping with the heritage and culture of North Kohala." The Puakea Guest Ranch is a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state. The CDP states that its goal is: To manage the future growth of the district in a manner that is consistent with the Kohala lifestyle and ideals of being a rural community with a strong cultural heritage, an agricultural base, and a small town feel. That overall goal is expressed through four Priority Issues, each with its own Goal. The Puakea Guest Ranch project is compatible with Priority Issue 1 and its Goal - Growth Management. Under 51 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment the CDP growth is to be directed "to areas within and near existing town centers in order to preserve the district's open space and cultural resources; and to promote agriculture." Other priority issues are Access—to provide for community access to mauka and makai resources; Affordable Housing—to provide affordable housing for the district's residents; and Infrastructure and Community Facilities— to update Kohala's infrastructure systems that are aging or in disrepair, and provide infrastructure, community facilities, and services that adequately serve the community on an on-going basis, and especially in times of emergency. The Puakea Guest Ranch is not inconsistent with these priority issues. Many of the goals, policies and strategies of the CDP involve strictly government actions or actions that do not relate to the property and the type of activities. One relevant strategy is the following: Strategy 1.9: Establish a View Plane Protection Program to identify and protect areas of significant beauty along the Kohala Mountain Road and Akoni-Pule Highway corridor. Discussion: No aspect of the Proposed Action would adversely affect any view plane. 52 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment PART 4: DETERMINATION Based on the findings below, and upon consideration of comments to the Draft EA, the applicant expects that the County of Hawai'i Planning Department will determine that the proposed action will not significantly alter the environment, as impacts will be minimal, and that this agency will accordingly issue a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI). PART 5: FINDINGS AND SUPPORTING REASONS Chapter 11-200.1-13, Hawai'i Administrative Rules, outlines those factors agencies must consider when determining whether an Action has significc nt effects. a) In considering the significance of potential environmental effects, agencies shall consider and evaluate the sum of effects of the proposed action on the quality of the environment. b) In determining whether an action may have a significant effect on the environment, the agency shall consider every phase of a proposed action, the expected impacts, and the proposed mitigation measures. In most instances, an action shall be determined to have a significant effect on the environment if it may: 1. Irrevocably commit a natural, cultural, or historic resource. No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost. Historic sites are being protected during adaptive re-use, and no natural -esources will be adversely affected. 2. Curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment. The principal beneficial use of the area is for existing ranch activities, which will be enhanced, not curtailed, by the Proposed Action. 3. Conflict with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law. The State's long-term environmental policies are set forth in Chapter 344, HRS. The broad goals of this policy are to conserve natural resources and enhance the quality of life. The Proposed Action provides guest facilities and employment while avoiding significant impacts to the environment. It is thus consistent with all elements of the State's long-term environmental policies. 4. Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare, or cultural practices of the community and State. The Proposed Action will not adversely affect the social welfare of the Big Island community or the State of Hawai'i and will contribute to the econorny and to the social environment of the area. The Guest Ranch would assist in maintaining agricultural uses on the property by subsidizing them and providing a built-in market for garden and farm produce, while also promoting historic preservation. S3 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment 5. Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. No effects to public health are anticipated. Water and air quality will be protected through adherence to standard Best Management Practices that will be specified as part of permits. 6. Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. No adverse secondary effects, such as increased population or substantial additional demand for government services, are expected to result from the Guest Ranch. Because of the nature of the Proposed Action increasing the value of the property and involving more guests and employees, real property, payroll, GET and TAT tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services. 7. Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality. The Proposed Action is taking place in a general area already impacted by ranching, vacation rentals and rural residential activities, and is being regulated by permits to avoid environmental degradation and thus would not contribute to environmental degradation. 8. Be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. Traffic impacts will have a non-negligible but very minor impact on cumulative traffic operations. No other adverse impact from the Proposed Action has the potential to accumulate with those from other past, present or reasonably foreseeable future actions in such a way as to increase the severity or nature of impacts. 9. Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare, threatened, or endangered species, or its habitat. The property supports overwhelmingly alien vegetation. With standard mitigation on timing of vegetation removal to protect Hawaiian hoary bats, impacts to rare, threatened or endangered species of flora or fauna will not occur. 10. Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels. The Guest Ranch would not be expected to have more than a negligible impact on air quality or water quality either during the minor scale of construction or during operation. Construction and operation would generate at least some level of noise, although the long distance to any sensitive receptors is in itself a mitigating factor. Construction plans from the contractor will be reviewed by DOH to determine if mitigation is required during construction. The layout of activities that have the potential to cause noise, plus restrictions on the scale and timing of various activities, should combine to reduce noise impacts at the property line to levels permissible in residential districts, which are much stricter than applicable agricultural standards that would apply for land use as a ranch or farm. 11. 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. Although the Proposed Action is located in an area with seismic risk, the entire Island of Hawai'i shares this risk, and the Proposed Action is not imprudent to implement. The property is not vulnerable to overland or stream flooding and is set at over 500 feet in elevation. Consultation of 54 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment the Hawaii Sea Level Rise Vulnerability and Adaptation Report and supporting Viewer indicate no risk of inundation due to sea level rise. Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that climate change may lead to drier rather than wetter conditions, increasing wildfire risk. If this occurs,the precautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk that are proposed as part of the Proposed Action will help mitigate additional potential risk. 12. Have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and view planes, during day or night, identified in county or state plans or studies. The Proposed Action is low-key and contained within an existing developed area and will have no impact on protected scenic view planes, including views from Akoni Pule Highway of the mountains. 13. Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases. Negligible amounts of energy input and greenhouse gas emissions are required for the Proposed Action construction and operation.The modest scale keeps it well within HELCO's capacity and no major adverse effects to energy consumption would be expected. The Proposed Action's design will include photovoltaic solar, energy efficient lighting fixtures, low water use fixtures, and low water use landscaping, which reduce energy use. 55 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment REFERENCES Banko, W. E. 1980. "Population Histories—Species Accounts Seabirds: Newell's Shearwater ('A'o)." Cooperative National Park Resources Studies Unit, University of Hawaii at Manoa, Department of Botany, Technical Report#5A. Coulter,J.W. 1971.Agricultural Land-Use Planning in the Territory of Hawaii 1940. Agricultural Extension Bulletin No. 36 Honolulu. County of Hawai'i Department of Water Supply (DWS). 2012. Hawaii County Water Use and Development Plan Update (Hawaii Water Plan). Prep. by Fukunaga and Associates, Honolulu. County of Hawai`i Planning Department. 2005. The General Plan, County of Hawai'i. Hilo. 2008. North Kohala Community Development Plan. 2008. Hilo. Day, R. H., B. Cooper, and T. C. Telfer. 2003. "Decline of Townsend's (Newell's Shearwaters (Puffinus auricularis newelli) on Kauai, Hawaii." The Auk 120: 669-679. Fornander, A. 1969.An Account of the Polynesian Race: Its Origin and Migrations. Tokyo: Charles E. Tuttle Co., Inc. 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. Gagne, W., and L. Cuddihy. 1990. "Vegetation," pp. 45-114 in W.L. Wagner, D.R. Herbst, and S.H. Sohmer, eds., Manual of the Flowering Plants of Hawai'i. 2 vols. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Giambelluca,T.W., Q. Chen, A.G. Frazier, J.P. Price, Y.-L. Chen, P.-S. Chu, J.K. Eischeid, and D.M. Delparte. 2014. Online Rainfall Atlas of Hawai`i. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc., doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D-11-00228.1. Hawai`i, Territory of. 1929. Indices of Awards Made by the Board of Land Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Archives of Hawaii. Territory of Hawai'i, Honolulu. 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. n.d. Native Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. 56 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment Heliker, C. 1990. Volcanic and Seismic Hazards on the Island of Hawai'i. Washington: U.S. GPO. Kamakau, S. 1992 (rev. ed.). Ruling Chiefs of Hawai'i. Honolulu: The Kamehameha Schools Press. Kirch, P. 1985. Feathered Gods and Fishhooks:An Introduction to Hawaiian Archaeology and Prehistory. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. 2011. "When did the Polynesians Settle Hawai'i?A Review of 150 Years of Scholarly Inquiry and a Tentative Answer." Hawaiian Archaeology Vol. 12:3-26. Pukui, M. S. Elbert and E. Mo'okini. 1976. Place Names of Hawai'i. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. Underwood, M.R., Meyer, W., and W.R. Souza. 1995. Ground-Water Availability from the Hawi Aquifer in the Kohala Area, Hawaii. U.S. Geological Survey Water-Resources Investigations Report 95-4113. Washington D.C. U.S. Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ). 2016. Final Guidance for Federal Departments and Agencies on Consideration of Greenhouse Gas Emissions and the Effects of Climate Change in National Environmental Policy Act Reviews. Guidance dated August 1, 2016, signed by C. Goldfuss, CEQ. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 2018. USFWS Threatened and Endangered Species System TESS). Washington: GPO. http://ecos.fws.gov/tess public/. (Accessed December 2018). U.S. Geological Survey (USGS). 2000.Seismic Hazard Mapsfor Hawaii. By F.W. Klein, A.D. Frankel, C.S. Mueller, R.L. Wesson and P.G. Okubo. U.S. Soil Conservation Service. 1973. Soil Survey of Island of Hawaii, State of Hawai'i. Washington: U.S.D.A. Soil Conservation Service. University of Hawai'i at Hilo, Dept. of Geography. 1998.Atlas of Hawai'i. 3rd ed. Honolulu: University of Hawai'i Press. University of Hawai'i at Manoa, Sea Grant College Program. 2014. Climate Change Impacts in Hawai'i-A summary of climate change and its impacts to Hawai'i's ecosystems and communities. UN I H I-SEAG RANT-TT-12-04. Waihona 'Aina Corporation. 2000. The Mahele Database, Waihona.com. Wolfe, E.W., and J. Morris. 1996. Geologic Map of the Island of Hawai'i. USGS Misc. Investigations Series Map i-2524-A. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey. 57 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawaii Appendix la Comments in Response to Early Consultation 4.• WATT SGo 19 49 4;= DEPARTMENT OF WATER SUPPLY • COUNTY OF HAWAII r" 345 KEKUANAO`A STREET, SUITE 20 • HILO, HAWAII 96720oFHAWP\\. TELEPHONE (808) 961-8050 • FAX (808) 961-8657 December 11,2018 Ms. Christie Cash Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway Haw% HI 96719 Dear Ms. Cash: Subject: Pre-Environmental Assessment Consultation Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit Tax Map Key 5-6-001:082 This is in response to your Pre-Environmental Assessment Consultation request dated November 26,2018. Please be informed that the subject parcel is served by an existing master meter which also provides service to eight(8)other parcels. The master meter is allowed an average usage of 3,600 gallons per day or 400 gallons per day for each parcel(adequate for only one(1) single-family dwelling/parcel). The Department will note that the average daily water consumption through the existing master meter,over the past two(2)year period, is approximately 5,550 gallons per day. The proposed use will increase water demand. However,the Department cannot provide any additional water at this time for any other type of development requiring additional water within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision. Extensive improvements and additions,which may include,but not limited to source, storage,booster pumps, transmission, and distribution facilities,would be required. Should there be any questions, please contact Mr.Ryan Quitoriano of our Water Resources and Planning Branchat961-8070, extension 256. Sincerely yours, Keith K. Okamoto, P.E. Manager-Chief Engineer RQ:dfg copy—Geometrician Associates Water, Our(Most Precious Resource. . . Kja Wai ane. . . The Department of Water Supply is an Equal Opportunity provider and employer. MSV Oi Harry Kim William A.Kucharski Mayor Director Wilfred M.Okabe a. Diane A.Noda Managing Director Deputy Director MIN Raillan DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT 345 Kekuanao'a Street,Suite 41• Hilo,Hawaii 96720 Ph:(808)961-8083• Fax:(808)961-8086 cohdem@co.hawaii.hi.us http://www.hawaiicountv.gov/environmental-management/ December 11, 2018 Ms. Christie Cash, Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway Hawi,Hawai`i 96719 Re: Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 Dear Ms. Cash: The Department of Environmental Management, County of Hawaii,has received your early consultation notification dated November 26,2918, and it has been reviewed by our Solid Waste Division and Wastewater Division. The Solid Waste Division has the following comments: Asbestos containing material (ACM)must be disposed of at the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill. Please contact the County's contracted operator, Waste Management of Hawaii, at(808) 886-0940 to complete a waste profile prior to disposal. Please remind your contractors that the solid waste transfer stations are for residential use only. Contractors must dispose of their waste at the West Hawaii Sanitary Landfill. Thank you for requesting input. Sincerely r 114 A. Kucharski Director WK:mef County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer y Fremont Law Group PLLC I E f10 R T3417 Fremont Avenue North, Suite 225 Seattle, WA 98103 By US Mail and Email December 31, 2018 Christine L. Cash 456 Lincoln Blvd. Santa Monica, CA 90402 Dear Ms. Cash, This firm represents that certain testamentary trust that is the fee owner of Lot 2, Puakea, North Kohala, Hawai'i, and its trustee, Mark Torrance. Mr. Torrance is in receipt of your November 26, 2018 letter describing the Environmental Assessment you are seeking for Lot 1, Puakea, and requests notice of the availability of the draft and final Environmental Assessment when it becomes available. Please send all relevant correspondence to my attention. In no event should this letter be construed to grant or imply any acceptance or approval by Mr. Torrance of the non-conforming uses on your property, or of his acceptance or approval of any application for a Special Use Permit on Lot 1. Mr. Torrance expressly reserves all rights of objection to any such uses, applications, and permits. Sincerely, FREMONT LAW GROUP PLLC Paul Okner 206) 399-1922 Cc: Puakea Ranch — PO Box 190768, Hawi, HI 96719 Christine Tetak Robert Morrison Reyn Yates DAVID Y.IGE JADE T.BUTAY GOVERNOR Sti DIRECTOR I` .tr. DeputyDirectors ROSS M.HIGASHI EDWIN H.SNIFFEN DARREtL T.YOUNG STATE OF HAWAII IN REPLYREFER TO: DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION HWY 2576 869 PUNCHBOWL STREET HWY-PS 2.9154 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96813-5097 January 7,2019 Ms. Christie Cash Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Hwy Hawi,Hawaii 96719 Dear Ms.Cash: Subject:Pre-Consultation for Environmental Assessment Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit Hawaii,North Kohala,Hawi,TMK: (3) 5-6-001: 082 Thank you for your letter of November 26, 2018 requesting input from the Hawaii Department of Transportation (HDOT) for the preparation of an Environmental Assessment(EA). The assessment is required for compliance with Hawaii Revised Statutes,Chapter 343 due to Puakea Ranch being on the Hawaii State Historic Register and your proposed guest ranch would be a use within the historic site. The HDOT requests that a Traffic Assessment be prepared by a licensed professional engineer and submitted for review and acceptance. The assessment should include estimated trip generation,an evaluation of the project access to Akoni Pule Highway,State Route 270,and recommend improvements as needed. These improvements shall be provided at no cost to the State. HDOT wishes to be a consulted party to the Draft EA. A copy of the assessment,when published should be submitted to the Highways Planning Branch and the Hawaii District Engineer. If there are any questions,please contact Ken Tatsuguchi,Engineering Program Manager, Highways Planning Branch,at(808) 587-1830. Please reference file review number 2011-247. Sincerely, 6.1"--1JADET.BUTAY Director of Transportation SY OF.k,, SHarryKim0• . •wq Darren J. Rosario Mayor i Fire Chief Lance S. Uchida 1+t9Tg•p NPCP _ Deputy Fire Chief County of )atlai`t HAWAII FIRE DEPARTMENT 25 Aupnni Street•Suite 2301•Hilo,Hawaii 96720 808)932-2900•Fax(808)932-2928 January 24, 2019 Ron Terry, Principal Geometrician Associates, LLC P.O.Box 396 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Mr. Ron Terry: SUBJECT: Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit,TMK -6-001:082,North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i In regards to the above-mentioned Environmental Assessment Early Consultation application,the following shall be in accordance: NFPA 1,UNIFORM FIRE CODE,2006 EDITION Note: Hawai`i State Fire Code, National Fire Protection Association 2006 version, with County ofHawai`i amendments. County amendments are identified with a preceding "C—"ofthe reference code. Chapter 18 Fire Department Access and Water Supply 18.1 General. Fire department access and water supplies shall comply with this chapter. For occupancies of an especially hazardous nature,or where special hazards exist in addition to the normal hazard of the occupancy, or where access for fire apparatus is unduly difficult. or areas where there is an inadequate fire flow,or inadequate fire hydrant spacing. and the AL-1.1 may require additional safeguards including, but not limited to, additional fire appliance units. more than one type of appliance, or special systems suitable for the protection of the hazard involved. 18.1.1 Plans. 18.1.1.1 Fire Apparatus Access. Plans for tire apparatus access roads :,hall he submitted to the tire department for review and approval prior to cuntructiun. 18.1.1.2 Fire Hydrant Systems. Plans and specifications fur lire hydrant , stems shall he suhmitted to the fire department for review and appro' priort•Yal to u,n.y it_t:ti•,tt. J ii.urui..:unty1, url .lu.dI%!.; rt:uII/l'r-'al-rand In!;-! 11•1 Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 2 C— 18.1.1.2.1 Fire Hydrant use and Restrictions.No unauthorized person shall use or operate any Fire hydrant unless such person first secures permission or a permit from the owner or representative of the department, or company that owns or governs that water supply or system. Exception: Fire Department personnel conducting firefighting operations, hydrant testing, and/or maintenance, and the flushing and acceptance of hydrants witnessed by Fire Prevention Bureau personnel. 18.2 Fire Department Access. 18.2.1 Fire department access and fire department access roads shall be provided and maintained in accordance with Section 18.2. 18.2.2*Access to Structures or Areas. 18.2.2.1 Access Box(es). The AHJ shall have the authority to require an access box(es) to be installed in an accessible location where access to or within a structure or area is difficult because of security. 18.2.2.2 Access to Gated Subdivisions or Developments. The AHJ shall have the authority to require fire department access be provided to gated subdivisions or developments through the use of an approved device or system. 18.2.2.3 Access Maintenance.The owner or occupant of a structure or area, with required fire department access as specified in 18.2.2.1 or 18.2.2.2, shall notify the AHJ when the access is modified in a manner that could prevent fire department access. 18.2.3 Fire Department Access Roads. (*may be referred as FDAR) 18.2.3.1 Required Access. 18.2.3.1.1 Approved tire department access roads shall he provided for every tkility, building., or portion of a building hereafter constructed or relocated. 18.2.3.1.2 Fire Department access roads shall consist of roadways, tire lanes, parking lots lanes. or a combination thereof. 18.2.3.1.3* When not more than two one- and 0,,,o-family dwellings or private garages, carport,_ sheds, agricultural buildings. and detached buildings or structures 40Ult' (37 nr') or less are present. the requirements of 18.2.3.1 through 18.2..1.2.1 shall he permitted t„ he modified by the A11.1. y Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 3 18.23.1.4 When fire department access roads cannot be installed due to location on property, topography,waterways, nonnegotiable grades, or other similar conditions,the AHJ shall be authorized to require additional fire protection features. 18.2.3.2 Access to Building. 18.2.3.2.1 A fire department access road shall extend to within in 50 ft(15 m) of at least one exterior door that can be opened from the outside that provides access to the interior of the building. Exception: 1 and 2 single-family dwellings. 18.2.3.2.1.1 When buildings are protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with NFPA 13,NFPA 13D, or NFPA 13R,the distance in 18.2.3.2.1 shall be permitted to be increased to 300 feet. 18.2.3.2.2 Fire department access roads shall be provided such that any portion of the facility or any portion of an exterior wall of the first story of the building is located not more than 150 ft 46 m)from fire department access roads as measured by an approved route around the exterior ofthe building or facility. 18.2.3.2.2.1 When buildings are protected throughout with an approved automatic sprinkler system that is installed in accordance with NFPA 13, NFPA 13D, or NFPA 13R, the distance in 18.2.3.2.2 shall be permitted to be increased to 450 ft(137 m). 18.2.3.3 Multiple Access Roads. More than one fire department access road shall be provided when it is determined by the AHJ that access by a single road could be impaired by vehicle congestion, condition of terrain, climatic conditions, or other factors that could limit access. 18.2.3.4 Specifications. 18.2.3.4.1 Dimensions. C- 18.2.3.4.1.1 FDAR shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 2011 with an approved turn around area if the FDAR exceeds 150 feet. Exception: FDAR. for one and two family dwellings shall have an unobstructed width of nclt less than 15 feet, with an area of not less than 20 feet ~vide within 150 feet of the structure being protected. An approved turn around area shall he provided if the FDAR exceeds 251) feet. C-- 18.2.3.4.1.2 FDAR shall have an unobstructed vertical clearance of not les.; then 1311 6 in. C- 18.2.3.4.1.2.1 Vertical clearance, may he incireased or reduced by the A11.1, provided such increase or reduction does not impair access by the tire apparatus. and appro r ed sign'; are installed and maintained indicating such approved change,. Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 4 18.2.3.4.1.2.2 Vertical clearances shall be increased when vertical clearances or widths are not adequate to accommodate fire apparatus. C 18.2.3.4.2 Surface.Fire department access roads and bridges shall be designed and maintained to support the imposed loads(25 Tons) of the fire apparatus. Such FDAR and shall be comprised of an all-weather driving surface. 18.2.3.4.3 Turning Radius. C— 18.2.3.4.3.1 Fire department access roads shall have a minimum inside turning radius of 30 feet, and a minimum outside turning radius of 60 feet. 18.2.3.4.3.2 Turns in fire department access road shall maintain the minimum road width. 18.2.3.4.4 Dead Ends. Dead-end fire department access roads in excess of 150 ft(46 m) in length shall be provided with approved provisions for the fire apparatus to turn around. 18.2.3.4.5 Bridges. 18.2.3.4.5.1 When a bridge is required to be used as part of a fire department access road, it shall be constructed and maintained in accordance with county requirements. 18.2.3.4.5.2 The bridge shall be designed for a live load sufficient to carry the imposed loads of fire apparatus. 18.2.3.4.5.3 Vehicle load limits shall be posted at both entrances to bridges where required by the AHJ. 18.2.3.4.6 Grade. C—' 18.2.3.4.6.1The maximum gradient of a Fire department access road shall nut exceed 12 percent for unpaved surfaces and 15 percent for paved surfaces. In areas of the MAR where a Fire apparatus would connect to a Fire hydrant or Fire Department Connection. the maximum gradient of such area(s) shall nut exceed 10 percent. 18.2.3.4.6.P The angle of approach and departure ti)r"any means of tire department access road shall not exceed I it drop in 20 It (0.3 rn drop in 6 n) or the design limitations of the tire apparatus of the tire department, and shall be subject t„ approval by the Al 1J. 18.2.3.4.6.3 [ire department access roads connecting to roadways shall he prov i(a_d with curb cuts extending at least 2 It(0.61 reit beyond each edge of the tire lane. Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 5 18.2.3.4.7 Traffic Calming Devices. The design and use of traffic calming devices shall be approved the AHJ. 18.2.3.5 Marking of Fire Apparatus Access Road. 18.2.3.5.1 Where required by the AHJ, approved signs or other approved notices shall be provided and maintained to identify fire department access roads or to prohibit the obstruction thereof of both. 18.2.3.5.2 A marked fire apparatus access road shall also be known as a fire lane. 18.2.4* Obstruction and Control of Fire Department Access Road. 18.2.4.1 General. 18.2.4.1.1 The required width of a fire department access road shall not be obstructed in any manner, including by the parking of vehicles. 18.2.4.1.2 Minimum required widths and clearances established under 18.2.3.4 shall be maintained at all times. 18.2.4.1.3* Facilities and structures shall be maintained in a manner that does not impair or impede accessibility for fire department operations. 18.2.4.1.4 Entrances to fire departments access roads that have been closed with gates and barriers in accordance with 18.2.4.2.1 shall not be obstructed by parked vehicles. 18.2.4.2 Closure of Accessways. 18.2.4.2.1 The AFIJ shall be authorized to require the installation and maintenance of gates or other approved barricades across roads, trails, or other accessways not including public streets, alleys, or highways. 18.2.4.2.2 Where required. gates and barricades shall he secured in an approved manner. 18.2.4.2.3 Roads, trails, and other access ways that have been closed and obstructed in the manner prescribed by 18.2.4.2.1 shall not be trespassed upon or used unless authorized by the owner and the Atli. 18.2.4.2.4 Public officers acting within their scope of duty shall he permitted to access, restricted property identified in 18.2.4.2.1. Ron Terry January-24,2019 Page 6 18.2.4.2.5 Locks,gates, doors, barricades, chains, enclosures,signs,tags, or seals that have been installed by the fire department or by its order or under its control shall not be removed, unlocked,destroyed,tampered with,or otherwise vandalized in any manner. 18.3 Water Supplies and Fire Hydrants 18.3.1*A water supply approved by the county, capable of supplying the required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which facilities or buildings, or portions thereof, are hereafter constructed,or moved into or within the county. When any portion ofthe facility or building is in excess of 150 feet(45 720 mm)from a water supply on a fire apparatus access road, as measured by an approved route around the exterior of the facility or building, on- site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow shall be provided when required by the AHJ. For on-site fire hydrant requirements see section 18.3.3. EXCEPTIONS: 1. When facilities or buildings,or portions thereof, are completely protected with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system the provisions of section 18.3.1 may be modified by the AHJ. 2. When water supply requirements cannot be installed due to topography or other conditions, the AHJ may require additional fire protection as specified in section 18.3.2 as amended in the code. 3. When there are not more than two dwellings, or two private garage, carports,sheds and agricultural. Occupancies,the requirements of section 18.3.1 may be modified by AHJ. 18.3.2* Where no adequate or reliable water distribution system exists, approved reservoirs, pressure tanks, elevated tanks, fire department tanker shuttles, or other approved systems capable of providing the required fire flow shall be permitted. 18.3.3* The location, number and type of fire hydrants connected to a water supply capable of delivering the required fire flow shall he provided on a fire apparatus access road on the site of the premises or both, in accordance with the appropriate county water requirements. 18.3.4 Fire hydrants and connections to other approved water supplies shall he accessible to the fire department. 18.3.E Private water supply systems shall he tested and maintained in accordance with NF1':\ 25 or county requirements as determined by the A11J. 18.3.6 Where required by the rV-li, fire hydrants subject to vehicular damage shall he pr{,tected unless located within a public right of way. Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 7 18.3.7 The AHJ shall be notified whenever any fire hydrant is placed out of service or returned to service. Owners ofprivate property required to have hydrants shall maintain hydrant records of approval,testing, and maintenance, in accordance with the respective county water requirements.Records shall be made available for review by the AHJ upon request. C-18.3.8 Minimum water supply for buildings that do not meet the minimum County water standards: Buildings up to 2000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 3,000 gallons of water available for Firefighting. Buildings 2001- 3000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 6,000 gallons ofwater available for Firefighting. Buildings, 3001-6000 square feet, shall have a minimum of 12,000 gallons of water available for Firefighting. Buildings, greater than 6000 square feet,shall meet the minimum County water and fire flow requirements. Multiple story buildings shall multiply the square feet by the amount of stories when determining the minimum water supply. Commercial buildings requiring a minimum fire flow of 2000gpm per the Department of Water standards shall double the minimum water supply reserved for firefighting. Fire Department Connections (FDC) to alternative water supplies shall comply with 18.3.8 (1)- 6)ofthis code. NOTE Tn that water catchment systems are being used as a means of water supply for firefighting,such systems shall meet the follov*ing requirements: 1) In that a single water tank is used for both domestic and firetighting water. the water for domestic use shall not he capable of being drawn from the water reserved for firefighting: 2) Minimum pipe diameter sizes from the water supply to the Fire Department Connection I FDC) shall he as follows: a) 4" for(_'900 PVC pipe: h) 4" for C:906 PE pipe: C) 3" for ductile Iron: d) 3' ti)r galvanised steel. Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 8 3) The Fire Department Connection(FDC) shall: a) be made of galvanized steel; b) have a gated valve with 2-1/2 inch,National Standard Thread male fitting and cap; c) be located between 8 ft and 16 ft from the Fire department access. The location shall be approved by the AHJ; d) not be located less than 24 inches, and no higher than 36 inches from finish grade, as measured from the.center ofthe FDC orifice; e) be secure and capable of withstanding drafting operations. Engineered stamped plans • may be required; f) not be located more than 150 feet of the most remote part, but not less than 20 feet, of the structure being protected; g) also comply with section 13.1.3 and 18.2.3.4.6.1 of this code. 4) Commercial buildings requiring a fire flow of 2000gpm shall be provided with a second FDC. Each FDC shall be independent of each other,with each FDC being capable of flowing 500gpm by engineered design standards. The second FDC shall be located in an area approved by the AHJ with the idea of multiple Fire apparatus'conducting drafting operations at once, in mind. 5) Inspection and maintenance shall be in accordance to NFPA 25. 6) The owner or lessee of the property shall be responsible for maintaining the water level, quality, and appurtenances of the system. EXCEPTIONS TO SECTION 18.3.8: 1) Agricultural buildings, storage sheds, and shade houses with no combustible or equipment storage. 2) Buildings less than 800 square feet in size that meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements. 3) For one and two family dwellings, agricultural buildings, storage sheds, and detached garages 80t) to 200( square feet in size, and meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements, the distance to the Fire Department Connection may be increased to IOW feet. 4) For one and two farnil!. d‘Aeilings, agricultural buildings. and storace sheds greater than 2000square feet. but less than 3000 square feet and meets the minimum Fire Department Access Road requirements, the distance to the lire Department t unnection may be increased to 500 feet. Ron Terry January 24,2019 Page 9 5) For buildings with an approved automatic sprinkler system,the minimum water supply required may be modified. If there are any questions regarding these requirements. please contact the Fire Prevention Bureau at(808) 932-2911. DARREN J. ROSARIO Fire Chief CB:ds Harry Kim r '. Paul K. Ferreira Mayor n ,a` `Police Chief T:oF•,,.` Kenneth Bugado,Jr. Deputy Police Chief County of Hawai'i POLICE DEPARTMENT 349 Kapi'olani Street • Hilo,Hawai'i 96720-3998 808)935-3311 • Fax(808)961-2389 January 23, 2019 Mr. Ron Terry c/o Geometrician Associates, LLC P.O. Box 396 Hilo, HI 96721 SUBJECT: EARLY CONSULTATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PUAKEA GUEST RANCH SPECIAL PERMIT, TMK 5-6-001:082, NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF HAWAI'I Dear Mr. Terry: Staff has reviewed Ms. Christie Cash's letter dated January 3, 2019, referencing an Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit, TMK 5-6-001:0082, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii, and have no comments at this time. We would appreciate notice of the availability of the Draft EA when it is completed. Should there be any questions, please contact Captain Jeremie Evangelista, Commander of the North Kohala District, at 889-6540. Sincerely, PAUL K. FERREIRA POLICE CHIEF J ' c tONVOR A. SISTAN OLICE CHIEF AREA II OPERATIONS JCE/jaj 19HQ0029 Hawai'i County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer" p1., t O F y SUZANNE D.CASE qk CHAIRPERSONDAVIDY.IGE h rasa y,,y GOVERNOROF HAWAII t x BOARD OF LANDAND NATURAL URCECES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENTiyli cWnd and to .L., _* Sr '%'' x'd; ,. , fi !'..l ,+' 63t = 0,ij STATE OF HAWAII 4a orrw ac DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES LAND DIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 February 14, 2019 Geometrician Associates, LLC Attention: Mr. Ron Terry via email: rterryhawaii.rr.com P.O. Box 396 Hilo, Hawaii 96721 Dear Mr. Terry: SUBJECT: Amended — Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit located at Hawi, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 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) Engineering Division and (b) Division of Forestry & Wildlife, (c) Commission on Water Resource Management, and (d) Land Division Hawaii District on the subject matter. Should you have any questions, please feel free to call Darlene Nakamura at (808) 587-0417. Thank you. Sincerely, Russell Y. Tsuji Land Administrator Enclosures cc: Central Files 6 0 F N SUZANNED.CASE 1 ^ '4": 94,yCHAIRPERSON DANHE Xtx 93g S`" BOARD OF LANDAND NATURALRESOURCES GOVERNOR OOFF HAWAII t COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCEzMANAGEMENTi oE nd Na U v.ibr'r rwrha I STATE OF HAWAII 1 •r 2 sta+eolHae' DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES n +J C,rrt LAND DIVISION rill— POST OFFICE BOX 621 C HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 3).=,Pc, r January 17, 2019 fry. Lo MEMORANDUM x} Ill: DLNR Agencies: x) s/\‘‘Div. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry &Wildlife Div. of State Parks M X Commission on Water Resource Management Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division — Hawaii District c-3 X Historic Preservation FROM:FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator SUBJECT: Amended— Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit LOCATION: Hawi, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 APPLICANT: Puakea Ranch Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by February 7, 2019. Please note that Applicant amended the proposed use of the special permit to include weddings, elopements, family reunions, birthday parties, etc., more specifically spelled out on Page 2, Paragraph 3. 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. Thank you. We have no objections. We have no comments. Comments ar attache. Signed: Print Name: i 'a . Chang, Chief Engineer Date: 2 7/ 7 Attachments cc: Central Files DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES ENGINEERING DIVISION LD/Russell Y. Tsuji Ref: Amended—Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit, Hawi,North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 COMMENTS The rules and regulations of the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP), Title 44 of the Code ofFederal 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. Be advised that 44CFR 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 Hazard Zones are designated on FEMA's Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM), which can be viewed on our Flood Hazard Assessment Tool (FHAT) (http://gis.hawaiinfip.org/FHAT). 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 808) 768-8098. 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. o Kauai: County of Kauai, Department of Public Works (808) 241-4846. Signed: CA C G, CHIEF ENGINEER Date: 2/7/t/ 94S7 OF N SUZANNE D.CASE p# I.B. CHAIRPERSONDAVIDY.ICE 1959 a t9 04, BOARD OF LAND AND NATURALRESOURCESGOVERNOROFHAWAIIJ. s COMMISSION ON WAT&,t RESOURCE 7 MANAGEMENTANDS rwod a` kms UPOSICIN 4 478 SHAN STATE OF HAWAII s,eofH/ rim tA I iT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES NATURAL RE CE5 LAND DIVISION SIA P KAWA!' POST OFFICE BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 January 17, 2019 MEMORANDUM P• VIA DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry &Wildlife Div. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division — Hawaii District X Historic Preservation 4-FFOM: \ 7 Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator/ UBJECT: Amended— Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit LOCATION: Hawi, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 APPLICANT: Puakea Ranch Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by February 7, 2019. Please note that Applicant amended the proposed use of the special permit to include weddings, elopements, family reunions, birthday parties, etc., more specifically spelled out on Page 2, Paragraph 3. 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. Thank you. We have no objections. We haven. comm: is Comment .- i - Jet. ISigned: Print Name: DAVID G.SMITH,Administrator Date: 1 I ilt7 Attachments cc: Central Files D k.'SCH NE.CASE DAVIDY.IDE 7".%I. 989 a 4i RSON BOARD OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES GOVERNOR OF HAWAII 1:CE,1V EO I , 0 t '_ COMMISSION ON WATERRESOURCE 2 Ly J ki(Jfiv-----L",..$1 11tA1VAGEMENT oaana LAND DIVISltlxsr —Nato 2f i 2019 JAN 31 AM 13= 38 16. N STATE OF HAWAII s4reorw Z tT£,QT.LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES NATURAL RESOURCE! DIVISION STATE OF HAW bLS«T OFFICE BOX 621 l WX. HONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 as cf Co.. a WOO T7:.• January 17, 2019 p1- r MEMORANDUM 3 TO DLNR Agencies: Div. of Aquatic Resources N Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation X Engineering Division X Div. of Forestry &WildlifeIDiv. of State Parks X Commission on Water Resource Management Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division - Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator/ SUBJECT: Amended- Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit LOCATION: Hawi, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 APPLICANT: Puakea Ranch Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by February 7, 2019. Please note that Applicant amended the proposed use of the special permit to include weddings, elopements, family reunions, birthday parties, etc., more specifically spelled out on Page 2, Paragraph 3. 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. Thank you. We have no objections. We have no comments. x) Comments are attached. Signed: Is/ M. Kaleo Manuel Print Name: Deputy Director Date: January 29, 2019 Attachments cc: Central Files FILE ID: 000`' DOC ID: p r,( oF. 4k4 i",b "-N' DAVID Y.IGE k o/ SUZANNE D.CASE GOVERNOR OFHAWAII S' ! -•44k."/:-_v CHAIRPERSON I ' ' - ' 1S{ 41 1 BRUCE S.ANDERSON,PH.D. c4'=A4 a WILLIAM D.BALFOUR,JR. 1., KA MAICNHAEL G.BUCK. D. a%17670NEIL J.HANNAHS PAUL J.MEYER MANUELSTATEOFHAWAIIM.KALEO DEPUTY DIRECTOR DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES COMMISSION ON WATER RESOURCE MANAGEMENT P.O.BOX 621 HONOLULU,HAWAII 96609 January 29,2019 REF: RFD.5000.8 TO:Mr. Russell Tsuji,Administrator Land Division FROM: M. Kaleo Manuel, Deputy Director '6 "C b6g Commission on Water Resource Management SUBJECT:Amended-Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit FILE NO.: RFD.5000.8 TMK NO.: 3)5-6-001:082 Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document. The Commission on Water Resource Management(CWRM) is the agency responsible for administering the State Water Code(Code). Under the Code,all waters of the State are held in trust for the benefit of the citizens of the State,therefore all water use is subject to legally protected water rights. CWRM strongly promotes the efficient use of Hawaii's water resources through conservation measures and appropriate resource management. For more information, please refer to the State Water Code, Chapter 174C, Hawaii Revised Statutes,and Hawaii Administrative Rules, Chapters 13-167 to 13-171. These documents are available via the Internet at http://dlnr.hawaii.ciov/cwrm. Our comments related to water resources are checked off below. n1. We recommend coordination with the county to incorporate this project into the county's Water Use and Development Plan. Please contact the respective Planning Department and/or Department of Water Supply for further information. 2. We recommend coordination with the Engineering Division of the State Department of Land and Natural Resources to incorporate this project into the State Water Projects Plan. n3. We recommend coordination with the Hawaii Department of Agriculture(HDOA)to incorporate the reclassification of agricultural zoned land and the redistribution of agricultural resources into the State's Agricultural Water Use and Development Plan(AWUDP). Please contact the HDOA for more information. 4. We recommend that water efficient fixtures be installed and water efficient practices implemented throughout the development to reduce the increased demand on the area's freshwater resources. Reducing the water usage of a home or building may earn credit towards Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design(LEED)certification. More information on LEED certification is available at http://www.usgbc.org/leed. A listing of fixtures certified by the EAP as having high water efficiency can be found at http://www.epa.gov/watersense. n5. We recommend the use of best management practices(BMP)for stormwater management to minimize the impact of the project to the existing area's hydrology while maintaining on-site infiltration and preventing polluted runoff from storm events. Stormwater management BMPs may earn credit toward LEED certification. More information on stormwater BMPs can be found at http://planning.hawaii.gov/czm/initiatives/low-impact-development/ I__I 6. We recommend the use of alternative water sources,wherever practicable. El7. We recommend participating in the Hawaii Green Business Program,that assists and recognizes businesses that strive to operate in an environmentally and socially responsible manner.The program description can be found online at http://energy.hawaii.gov/green-business-program. n8. We recommend adopting landscape irrigation conservation best management practices endorsed by the Landscape Industry Council of Hawaii. These practices can be found online at Mr. Russell Tsuji Page 2 January 29, 2019 http://www.hawaiiscape.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/LICH_I rrigation_Conservation_BM Ps.pdf. n9. There may be the potential for ground or surface water degradation/contamination and recommend that approvals for this project be conditioned upon a review by the State Department of Health and the developer's acceptance of any resulting requirements related to water quality. n10 The proposed water supply source for the project is located in a designated water management area,and a Water Use Permit is required prior to use of water. The Water Use Permit may be conditioned on the requirement to use dual line water supply systems for new industrial and commercial developments. n11 A Well Construction Permit(s)is(are)are required before the commencement of any well construction work. n12 A Pump Installation Permit(s)is(are)required before ground water is developed as a source of supply for the project. 13 There is(are)well(s)located on or adjacent to this project. If wells are not planned to be used and will be affected by any new construction,they must be properly abandoned and sealed. A permit for well abandonment must be obtained. U14 Ground-water withdrawals from this project may affect streamflows,which may require an instream flow standard amendment. n15 A Stream Channel Alteration Permit(s)is(are)required before any alteration can be made to the bed and/or banks of a steam channel. n16 A Stream Diversion Works Permit(s)is(are)required before any stream diversion works is constructed or altered. 17 A Petition to Amend the Interim lnstream Flow Standard is required for any new or expanded diversion(s) of surface water. n18 The planned source of water for this project has not been identified in this report. Therefore,we cannot determine what permits or petitions are required from our office,or whether there are potential impacts to water resources. X OTHER: The proposed water source(s)and projected water demands for the project, both potable and non- potable,should be identified and the calculations used to estimate demands should be provided. A discussion of the potential impacts on water resources and other public trust uses of water should be included, and any proposed mitigation measures described. Water conservation and efficiency measures to be implemented should also be discussed. If you have any questions, please contact Lenore Ohye of the Commission staff at 587-0216. SUZANNE D.CASE DAVID Y.IGE CHAIRPERSON GOVERNOR OF HAWAII y sem BOARD OFLAND ANDNATURAL RESOURCES ra COMMISSION ON WATERRESOURCE MANAGEMENT oElp4darM/ yah. yx/0/8117,;.10 •I 02:42• STATE OF HAWAII sinto ofHo°% DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES /019 JAN 8 P 51LANDDIVISION POST OFFICE BOX 621 RECEIVEDHONOLULU,HAWAII 96809 LAND DIVISION HILO, HAWAII January 17, 2019 MEMORANDUM TO: DLNR Agencies: c r- Div. of Aquatic Resourcesyam- i„ Co. 751. Div. of Boating & Ocean Recreation y--I X Engineering Division o -n co X Div. of Forestry &Wildlife Div. of State Parks Viaitir X Commission on Water Resource Management Office of Conservation & Coastal Lands X Land Division- Hawaii District X Historic Preservation FROM: Russell Y. Tsuji, Land Administrator/L% SUBJECT: Amended- Early Consultation for Environmental Assessment for the Proposed Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit LOCATION: Hawi, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii; TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 APPLICANT: Puakea Ranch Transmitted for your review and comment is information on the above-referenced subject matter. We would appreciate your comments by February 7, 2019. Please note that Applicant amended the proposed use of the special permit to include weddings, elopements, family reunions, birthday parties, etc., more specifically spelled out on Page 2, Paragraph 3. 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. Thank you. AVe have no objections. We have no comments. Comments are attached. A Signed: Print Name: e:3t'/ f, 1 Date: 7 Attachments cc: Central Files Harry Kim 1° ':• : David Yamamoto,P.E. Mayor n Director Wil Okabe a°fM, Allan G.Simeon,P.E. Managing Director DeputyDirector 4.I1funfg IXf Aft tt't DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 7 Hilo,Hawaii 96720-4224 808)961-8321 Fax(808)961-8630 public_}•orksctihawaiicounty.gov February 26, 2019 ATTN: Christie Cash Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway Hawi, HAWAII 96719 SUBJECT: EARLY CONSULTATION FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT FOR PUAKEA GUEST RANCH SPECIAL PERMIT NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF HAWAII TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 We received the subject dated November 30, 2018 and have the following comments: 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. 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. All activities shall comply with the requirements of Hawaii County Code, Chapter 10, Erosion and Sedimentary Control. Agricultural operations may qualify for a conservation program with the applicable soil and water conservation district. An approved conservation program would be an exclusion to Chapter 10. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please contact Ms. Robyn Matsumoto in our Engineering Division at(808) 961-8924. r B' ISHII, Division Chief Engineering Division RM nunty of1aawai`i ie an Pnnal flnnnrlrrnit,Prnv,Apr and Pn,nlmrnr ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawai`i Appendix lb Comments to Draft EA and Responses Q LE, wassy Fremont Law Group PLLC 1ZEnonT3417 Fremont Avenue North, Suite 225 Seattle, WA 98103 7w e` er September 3, 2019 By Email and by FedEx Michael Yee Planning Director County of Hawai'i 74-5044 Ane Keohokalole Hwy Kailua-Kona, Hawai'i 96740 Re: Public Comment to Puakea Guest Ranch DEA-AFONSI, TMK (3) 5-6- 001:082 Dear Mr. Yee, This firm represents that certain testamentary trust that is the fee owner of Lot 2, Puakea, North Kohala, Hawai'i, and its trustee, Mark Torrance. Mr. Torrance is in receipt of the DEA-AFONSI submitted by Ms. Christine Cash for the Puakea Guest Ranch, located on Lot 1, Puakea, North Kohala, Hawai'i, published on August 23, 2019. Mr. Torrance's Lot 2 is adjacent to Ms. Cash's Lot 1 to the southeast. On behalf of Mr. Torrance, we respectfully submit the following comments regarding the applicant's DEA-AFONSI. Existing Non-Conforming Uses As admitted in the applicant's DEA, the applicant currently uses the property in a manner in violation with applicable zoning codes and building codes (See Section 2.2, page 17), as well as in violation of restrictive covenants burdening the property. One such recent illegal event occurred on August 22, 2019. We have gone on the record with the applicant to object to such uses in the past, and we will continue to object for as long as is necessary. Such objections aside, though, it is clear that the applicant's non-compliant uses of the property to date provide empirical, non-speculative evidence of certain negative environmental impacts of the uses proposed in the DEA. Many of these known environmental impacts are discussed below. 1 Flora and Fauna In Section 3.1.4 (Page 28) of the DEA, the applicant claims that operation of the Guest Ranch "will produce almost no impacts to any species of flora or fauna other than the alien species already present," but fails to acknowledge that such alien species, such as livestock, may be significantly affected by such operations. Indeed, the applicant currently hosts wedding receptions and similar events on the property, giving insight into these effects. One such event took place on the evening of August 22, 2019. A neighbor reported "a very loud event going on in the upper pavilion," and complained of "very loud music and people yelling and having fun I guess." See attached Exhibit A, which is indicative of correspondence received by Mr. Torrance from his tenants who are using Lot 2 in conformance with applicable laws. The tenant noted that a horse and a mule in the smaller pasture near the party were visibly stressed by the commotion. Given that the current, un- permitted operations of the guest ranch are causing evident disturbances to the neighboring animals, it is clear that allowing such operations to continue will result in further disruption and stress to the surrounding environment and livestock. Noise The applicant acknowledges that prior events at the property have caused noise disturbances to neighboring parcel owners (Section 3.1.5, page 30). The applicant's mitigation proposals include limiting noise to certain hours of operation and setting volume limits, but similar to the disturbances to neighboring livestock, prior non-conforming uses by the applicant have provided empirical evidence that such illegal uses of the parcel as a Guest Ranch, even with limitations on hours, do indeed cause excessive noise to neighboring parcels. Additionally, environmental concerns are not limited to the volume of noise, but also the character of such noise. Agriculturally zoned land may provide for high permissible sound levels, but neighboring owners take title with the understanding that such noise will be of an agricultural nature, and not caused by large groups of revelers drinking and dancing well after the sun has set. Furthermore, the self-policing mitigation measures proposed by the applicant give little confidence to neighboring parcel owners, who have seen firsthand the applicant's disregard for existing restrictions set forth in zoning laws, building codes, and restrictive covenants. In short, we believe that the noise from large parties and live music is out of character with the prevailing agricultural zoning, and that based on prior and current practices by the applicant, the applicant's proposed noise mitigation measures will be ignored by both the applicant and its customers, to the detriment of the environment, all neighboring parcels, and their inhabitants. Fire 2 As noted in the applicant's DEA, the property has a significant risk of fire due to its dry, windy climate (See 3.1.2, page 19). Humans are the cause of the overwhelming majority of wildfires worldwide, and bringing large amounts of people to an agriculturally zoned land greatly increases the chances of one of them carelessly starting a fire with candles or cigarettes. Significant alcohol use, as is common at many weddings, will only increase this risk further. Neighboring parcel owners took title to their land with the understanding that the land was agriculturally zoned, and not with the expectation of large, alcohol-fueled gatherings where smokers may carelessly start fires in dry pastures and thereby threaten the safety of neighboring parcels and their inhabitants. Traffic Applicant acknowledges that large events at the property result in increased traffic and present potential safety concerns at the exit off of Akoni Pule Highway Section 3.3.2, page 41). Applicant proposes using professional traffic control to facilitate safer vehicle access at such times. However, the self-policing mitigation measures proposed by the applicant give little confidence to neighboring parcel owners, who have seen firsthand the applicant's disregard for existing restrictions set forth in zoning laws, building codes, and restrictive covenants. In short, we believe that based on prior and current practices by the applicant, the applicant's proposed traffic mitigation measures will be ignored by both the applicant and its customers, to the detriment of the environment, all neighboring parcels, and their inhabitants. Additionally, the expanded uses proposed by applicant will cause increased traffic in violation of restrictive covenants affecting the property. The property and its neighboring parcels are subject to a series of Amended and Restated Declarations of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions ("CCRs") (see, for example, Recording Doc. No. 2005-115157 and Doc. No. 2008-104554). One such CCR (Recording Doc. No. 2008-104554) specifically states that "the use of the access and utility easement areas [crossing the applicant's property]...shall be limited to the uses legally permitted under applicable State and County land use laws and ordinances." Legally permitted uses on the property are those set forth in the zoning classification for agricultural land, and do not include the operation of a guest ranch and hosting of large parties. The continued use of the property for these uses creates an environment out of step with that agreed upon and accepted by the applicant and the owner of the parcels also subject to the CCRs. Finally, operation of the property as a guest ranch has caused unreasonable amounts of airborne dust, traffic and congestion on the property itself, blocking access to neighboring parcels for extended periods of time. Mr. Torrance's tenants 3 have been unable to reach their land and livestock on certain occasions due to large numbers of cars and tour buses at the applicant's property during events, blocking the access easement to the neighboring parcel. This unacceptable disruption is only likely to increase in the event the operation of the guest ranch is sanctioned and allowed to increase. Utilities Applicant proposes the construction of a new septic system on the property to accommodate its large gatherings (Section 3.3.1, page 40). The applicant has provided little information regarding the size or location of such a system, leaving concerns about whether it will be consistent with the non-residential nature of the surrounding areas. Based on the foregoing concerns, we are confident that the applicant's proposed use of the property will have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore support a finding of No Action by the Planning Department (i.e. not granting a FONSI) to ensure that no further environmental impacts from the operations of a Guest Ranch are allowed to occur. In the event the Planning Department is not prepared to make such a finding at this time, we request that, at a minimum, the Planning Department require an Environmental Impact Statement in order to shed further light on the significant effects this proposed use will have on its surroundings. Sincerely, FREMONT LAW GROUP PLLC Paul Okner 206) 399-1922 Cc: Christine L. Cash PO Box 190768 Hawi, HI 96719 4 Exhibit A Representative Email from Tenant From: Robbie< Date: Wednesday, August 28, 2019 at 5:48 PM To: Mark Torrance Jack Larson 11111111111 Subject: FW: Puakea Ranch news Hi Mark, Jack, Hope all is well with you both ;-) Marley sent this to me this morning. I sent it to Bob Morrison and Donna Oba and wanted to send it over to you both as well. Also wanted to mention:Last Thursday evening 8/22 I arrived at the property after 7pm and there was a very loud event going on in the upper pavilion, the horse and mule were running around in the smaller pasture somewhat stressed due to the very loud music and people yelling and having fun I guess. I was not able to take a picture or video as my cell battery was almost dead, I had been at acupuncture and was late getting home. I called Bob and Donna as soon as I was in Hawi(cell range)to see if they could come over to take pictures/video etc but they were off island in California. I went back Friday night and Saturday ready to video but no other events in the evening last weekend. That's it for now..please let me know if you have any questions and I will send more updates if anything happens. Hope you are both well- Much aloha, Rob;) 5 56-zgbi AKONI PULE N16HWAY HAW , HAWAI'I 9671 808.315'OM wWW.PUAKEARANCH.COM October 21, 2019 Mark Torrance c/o Paul Okner Fremont Law Group PLLC 3417 Fremont Avenue North, Suite 225 Seattle, WA 98103 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Mr. Okner: Thank you for your comment letter dated September 03, 2019, in which you stated that there are negative environmental impacts of the uses proposed in the DEA and then discussed disruption and stress to the surrounding environment and livestock, environmental concerns due to the volume and character of noise disturbances, fire risk, traffic increase and the effect on the access easement, and finally concern about the wastewater system's consistency with the non-residential nature of the surrounding area. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision, please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements, the share of water each lot gets and the use of water, and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs.While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts of these matters and whether there are any actual issues, we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion. However, these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment, the community, or other resources. They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. Existing Non-Conforming Uses The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission.We are simply 1 conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Flora and Fauna We acknowledge your comment regarding introduced species associated with ranches and farms. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 (Page 25) of the EA.Additionally, we are unaware of any scientific studies that show that domestic animals that are penned in large lots adjacent to a site hosting a party of the types proposed for the operation would actually suffer any adverse impacts. 3. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise including the character of the noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. Furthermore, there are appropriate legal remedies regarding the enforcement of noise violations. This is covered in Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR),Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control." In addition, the State Department of Health maintains reference to describe various kinds of noise, their sources and who you should contact to resolve the problem. 4. Fire We acknowledge your comment regarding fire and share the general concern of human caused events. As such we enforce a strict no open flame rule with all guests.Additionally all campfires are prearranged and managed by Puakea Ranch staff. Guests are not allowed to start any fires. This is addressed in Section 3.1.2 of the EA. 5. Traffic We acknowledge your comment regarding traffic. This is addressed in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. Thank you for sharing the concern regarding onsite access.Any legal access rights will not be hindered. This information has been added to the Final EA(FEA). 6. Utilities We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater, specifically, proposed septic systems. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA.Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health, per Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems." We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 315-0805. Sincerely, 2 Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 3 h rl Thomas and Claire Leonardi 12 Stonefield Road Avon,CT 06001 rdiThomasbleonau mail corn A-, ti September 11,20191 r' Planning Director Michael Yee s u , r, County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo,Hawaii 96720 RE Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3) 5-6-001 082 North Kohala Distract,Island of Hawaii Dear Planning Director Yee Thank you for the opportunity to review the subject document We believe that there are significant negative environmental issues surrounding the subject property that impact all of the eight other lot owners in the Puakea Ranch subdivision These include light pollution, noise pollution and extraordinary water usage that adversely impact neighboring properties We also ask that you reject the DEA until such time that the November 2018 complaint filed against the Beverly Hills owners('operator")is resolved Any consideration of the DEA is premature as it requests the expansion of the existing unpermitted Guest Ranch activities alleged in the complaint A oiling for the disnussalldenial of the DEA by the Planning Director is therefore appropriate until the Court rules on these allegations, which includes injunctive relief and payment of accrued fines currently m excess of$350,000 In the event that you decide to consider the DEA pnor to resolution of the complaint, the applicant's proposed use will definitely have a significant effect on the environment and these activities are specifically prohibited by the Puakea Ranch subdivision's CC&Rs, the benefits of which all lot owners relied upon when purchasing their property Therefore,we support the alternative of No Action by the Planning Department(le not granting a FONSI) Sinc Thomas B Leonards Member Manager Rainbow Ranch LLC Owner Lot 7 Puakea Ranch Subdivision 127855 u 11 56-2MMONI PULE I116HWAY HAM, HAWAII 96719 POI,"680`J WWW.PUAKEARANCH.CoM October 21, 2019 Thomas Leonardi Rainbow Ranch LLC 12 Stonefield Road Avon, CT 06001 via thomas_b_leonardi@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Mr. Leonardi: Thank you for your comment letter dated September 11, 2019, in which you stated that there are negative environmental issues surrounding the subject property including light pollution, noise pollution and water use. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision, please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements, the share of water each lot gets and the use of water, and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs.While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts of these matters and whether there are any actual issues, we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion. However, these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment, the community, or other resources. They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. County ofHawai'i enforcement action The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 1 2. Light pollution We acknowledge your comment regarding light pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 of the EA.All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County of Hawai'i Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai`i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. 3. Noise pollution We acknowledge your comment regarding noise pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. 4. Water usage We acknowledge your comment regarding water usage. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA.In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination of these sources of water will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors.As a user of the current shared water system, you should be aware that our water meter is the master meter. Therefore any and all leaks between the master meter and the other eight individual meters will all be recorded on the usage readings for our lot. We plan to address this poorly conceived layout in the immediate future to ensure Lot 1 no longer carries the expense burden from leaks. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 2 z G L 4 September 19, 2019 t 4 Michael Yee, Director a County of Hawaii Planning Department gT 3 Aupuni Center, Suite101PauahtStreet I Hilo, HI 96720 Subject Draft Environmental Assessment TMK (3)5-6-001 082 777_ ` `."' Dear Mr Yee co Please note that the subject lot is one of nine lots in the Puekea Ranch Subdrvision I am a full- time resident on one of the nine lots Who wrote this report'? The property owners?Authorship of this report is not clearly identr5ed The conclusions of any environmental assessment —draft or final —should be written by qualified and unbiased third parties Furthermore, closer examination of the current and proposed commercial activities would show that usage exceeds 15 acres of the lot's 32 acres The licensed surveyor is not noted The traffic study did riot address the impact on the easement road to the mauka lots Noise from night-time activities affect the animals on adjacent lots The report also does not address the unpermitted renovations and increasing number of rented buildings that precede the proposed expansion Nothing is mentioned about permitting existing buildings or that the State Histoncal Society was Informed of the renovations and changes of use prior to construction Finally, the report is silent on the pending lawsuit filed by the County of Hawai i Corporation Counsel against the owners Any opinion of the Draft Environmental Assessment should not be rendered until the lawsuit is decided Allowing activities contrary to established zoning and land use, which the property owner has been doing for ten-plus years, opens the door to further disregard of county laws and regulations, not just by the owners but by other property ownerawho follow by example Very truly yours, Ai Donna Oba 56-2773 Lahuiki Place Haws, HI 96719 cc Chnstte Cash, Co-Owner 127856 r. a O1x0 f19 StP IR P ' 3 98 is 011 a 41 MsPitti, w"ti11T t4 atm 1-114M 1 1 1 to tr 2 O ." C = N X QTO 0c0 112 - m m d I CA m 0 § 0 IP C 1 M i . Z CP tr gy%4 ' i,:':1•:1- I WA1 56.286j MONI PUU MIrHWAY HAWI,HAWAII 967Ip BQ8 315•°8° WWW.PUAKEARANLH.COM November 1, 2019 Donna Oba PO BOX 195 Hawi, HI 96719 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island ofHawai`i Dear Ms. Oba: Thank you for your comment letter dated September 19, 2019, in which you stated a number of concerns including the proposed usage acreage, the traffic impact on the easement road, noise pollution,permitted renovations, building use and Historical Society notice. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision,please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements,the share of water each lot gets and the use of water, and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs. While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts of these matters and whether there are any actual issues, we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion. However, these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment, the community, or other resources. They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment EA)was prepared with the support of the consultants listed on the DEA title page, with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. Usage acreage The DEA was prepared with the assistance of a team of professionals and are identified in the DEA on the Title Page under"Contributing Consultants."Additional support was provided by Roger Fleenor, the licensed surveyor, who surveyed the property and requested setbacks. The Special Permit Area is shown on the Site Plan, Figure 4 on Page 14 of the EA. That area encompasses the entirety of the proposed use and is confirmed to be 14.9 acres. The boundary is depicted with the short dash-dash line and is detailed with azimuths and bearings. In confirming the acreage, a correction was made to one of the bearings. This information has been added to the Final EA (FEA). It did not affect the Special Permit Area. 1 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 The applicant has operated an illegal business for 12 years that violate County of Hawaii zoning and building codes 4 as well as State of Hawaii ordinances (Department ofHealth DOH) and terms ofthe State Historical Preservation Division (SHPT) registry)5 A March 19, 2009 Notice of Violation (NOV) issued by the County of Hawaii Planning Department ordered the applicant to immediately cease and desist unpermitted activities 6 and informed the applicant that a Special Permit was required ' Despite this Order, the applicant expanded the business via the construction of additional unpermitted dwellings and activities The applicant now asks for a Special Permit. This historical context and the pending lawsuit argue for the dismissalldenial of the DEA until the Court resolves the numerous allegations, jinluiicnons and collection of accrued fines tug of Draft Environmental Assessment If you decide to consider the DEA prior to the Court's ruling,the DEA supports a clear finding of NO ACTION, including an evaluation ofthe 13 criteria described m §11- 200 1-13 An expanded discussion of several ofthe applicant's responses to several of these criteria is warranted given the actual evidence Five topics were selected for your consideration 8 Cultural and Historical Resources The applicant submitted an application to SHPD for hsttng on the State Historical register ' which was granted on August 8, 2009 In the application, structures unrelated to the historical operation of Puakea Ranch, including an.unpermitted luxury tree house i°and The first identified amiplaint to the County of Hawaii Planning Department is dated November 18,2008 Operafrng commercial resort ranch iia Ag District Complainant states that there cs a letter onfile froth the Planning Dept which prohibits this operation [BOA 17-003170 pg 68] i§6E-100)Any peison,natural or corporate,who violates the provisions of this section shall be fined not more than 1:I 000 and each day ofcontinued violation shall constitute a distinct and separate offense under this section for which the offender may be punished. 6 County of Hawaii Planning Department,March 19,2009 Notice of Violation and Order 1 Immediately Cease and desist from operating the Guest Ranch on the above referenced property 2 immediately Cease and desist the habitation ofany unpermitted dwellings Pg 5 [BOA-17-000170] 7 County ofHawaii Planning Department,March 19, 2009 Notice of Violation and Order Complaint Operating a Guest Ranch in an Agriculture District Unperir itted Dwellings in an Agriculture District,pg 5 For clarification,on page 16 the DEA the applicant has listed 4Oba Ranch/Robert Momsoa"as a neig}ibonng resident who" were consulted in various stages ofthe development ofthe enrronmeatal assessment This is a false statement 11-200 1-13 Irrevocably commit a natural,cultural or historic resource (Criteria#1) 1O A TrtpAdvisor review indicates that the luxury treehouse was rented on October of2008 Another TnpAdvisor review indicates that the two swimming pools associated with Yoshi's House and Miles Away Cottage were present m December of2005 and June of 2009,respectively 2 t i Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 two unpermitted swimming pools 11 constructed by the owners prior to August of 2009 were not disclosed and clearly have no relationship to preserving the cultural or historical resources on the property 12 The application also did not disclose the extensive renovation ofthe cottages, including pools that occurred m 2007 13 Listmg on the Historic Register requires that proposed uses on the register requires anEnvironmentalAssessment (EA)per HRS#343 5(4)to be performed Puakea Ranch was informed and aware of these requirements by December of 2009 but never complied 14 Another requirement for listing on the register requires that the owner notify SHPD of any proposed alteration, disposition or improvement of any nature on a histonc property,as set forth in §6E-1O(a) 13 Despite tins requirement,the applicant dud not inform SHPD of the construction of a third pool, the placement of an Airstream trailer rental, the construction of an=permitted wedding chapel to 2015, the renovation of the Toy Bo cJDhana at an unknown time and a 2010 grading project of unknown depth In 2016, Puakea Ranch was again informed ofthe requirement to notify SHPD of any property alteration and directed to acquire permits/approvals for structures constructed on the property 16 In 2017,the County of Hawaii Planning Department again notified the operator that the Airstream trailer rental and wedding pavilion were built without SHPT}approval 17 To my knowledge, SHPD was never informed ofthese activities or granted approval 11 County ofHawau Planning Department,March 19,2009 Notice of Violation and Order ComplaintOperatingaGuestRanchinanAgricultureDistrictUnpermattedDwellingsinanAgricultureDistrict.,pg2bTwoswimmingpoolswerealsoidentifiedTripAdvisorReviewYoshisHouse, which we stayed a! has a swimmingpool "Date of Stay December 2008. hops l www.Prioadvts cont Revs - 05 2- d123SO11-Revs +i-orl60-Pt a ch-Haw land . Hawaii e au h, fiREV! W. (Accessed 1- 26-2019)I i A December 20,2007 letter to Planning Director Yuen from James Nelson and Christine Cash states We are working toward placing ourproperty the former Paakea Planation and Ranch Headquarters, on theStateandNationalHistoricregistersothatacanbepreservedasanauthenticexampleofthepast 13 The application for listing on the register includes photographs of the dwellings taken in 2009 which ata not appear to represent the actual renovated features that occurred in 2007 It is unknown whether this was tntenttonal or an error in the application 14A December 23,2009 letter from the County of Hawaii Planning Department to Joanne Anzurni,statesInshereplacementormodificationofarnystrrrcture,since the subject property is now listed on the National Historic Register the owner must also comply with the requirements ofChaplet 343, IfRS and the requirements ofthe State of& aaii Department ofLand and Natural resources State Historic Preservation mice. 15 In the August 31,2009 letter from SHPD to Puakea Ranch regarding the listing ofPuakea Ranch on theHawaiiRegisterofHistoncPlacesandNominationtotheNationalRegisterofHistonePlacesforPuakea Ranch,the letter states that in the event that any histonc resources are encountered dunng construction that SHPD be immediately cantacted Puakea Ranch was again informed of these provisions in a 2016 County ofHawaii Warning Letter and the March 8 and July 28th,2017 County of Hawaii Planning Department Notice of Violations and Orders 78 County ofHawaii Planning Department,March 28, 2016 Warning Letter Complaint Conducting an Alleged Non-Agriculture Business in an Agriculture DIstrrct ii County of Hawaii Planning Department,March 8,2017 Notice of Violation and Order,July 28.2017SbThewpermutedRecreationalstructurethatwasbud:without the necessary,approvalsfrom the Planning Department and State Historical Preservation Division 5c The Airstream mobile trailer namedWallythatwasplacedontheabovereferencedpropertywithoutfirstacquiringanadditionalfarm 3 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment{DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 The extent to which these unpermitted construction/grading projects damaged historic resources is unknown. The violations of Histonc Register listing by the applicant has clearly negatively impacted the cultural and historical resources on the property which are now lost The proposed expansion oftis unpermitted business.and stated compliance and concern with the histoncal and cultural impacts (No impacts to significant archaeological features would occur pg in of the DEA) are inconsistent with the applicant's historical and ongoing practice Rewarding a decade of cultural and histoncal resource violations while now proposing an expansion ofthe business that purportedly protects the cultural and natural resources is another factor for granting a NO ACTION determination or outright dismissal ofthe DEA Unpermitted Disposal of Sewage la The applicant has discharged sewage from at least six cesspools into the environment for at least 12 years iv There is no documentation that:>ewage from three of the luxury cottages (2007-present), unpermitted treehouse (201)7-present) or Airstream trailer(2013- present) is discharged into any type ofwastewater system as only one cesspool permits has been filed (2006) An advertisement for the trailer includes the description of a bath house with a normal size flush toilette andpiping hot waterfor your ocean view showers 24 while the continued use the treehouse is proposed 21 The single permit for a cesspool for Yoshi's House(August 28, 2006) likely qualifies as a large capacity cesspool (LCCs) 2 It is unknown whether additional cesspools are present and/or in use at the property The discharge ofunpermttted sewage for over a decade illustrates a lack of concern for the environment and its continued desecration The applicant continues to pollute the dwelling approvalfrom the Planning Department and approvalfrom the,.Sate Historical Preservation Division Pg 3 1.1-200 1-13 Conflict with the States environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law (Cntena*3)Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality(criteria'7)19 Chnsnne L.Cash,May 26,2011 Special Use Permit Application-Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akom Pule Hwy,Haws,HI TMK(3)-5-6-1-82 The property cirrrently has six existing cesspools that we are aware ofNoimprovementand/or expansion of the existing systems are being contemplated at this time for the requested use Should art upgrade be required to meet with prevailing Stare ofHealth requirentemts we are prepared to do it along w2lth any apprcrvedand permitted plans The 2011 Special Permit was subsNuently withdrawn 2°Wally the Airstream http flwwuspuakcaranch cgrnfmur the-cottages/wally/[Accessed 1-4-2019]21 Draft Environmtntal Assessment and Anticipated Finding of No Significance Puakea Guest Ranch Pg 5 Additionally the Tree House is currently usedandwould.3ontimie to be used os afarm dwelling for the owner and caretaker Within the special permit application that structure wnarfd be proposed to convert to a guest unit and plans topermit that struCni a or replace it would proceed once granted the specialpermit 2-1 The United States Environmental Protection Agencyprohibited the construction/use ofnew large capacity cesspools(LCCs) by April 5 2000 The regulations also require owners to upgrade ofclose existing WCs by April 5 2005 State of Hawaii Department ofHealth,August 13.2004 EPA 909-F-04- 005 4 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 environment while proposing to adhere to wastewater regulations for the proposed expansion 23 At any point since 2007, the applicant had the opportunity to file permits and comply with the Department ofHealth requirements but did not. In addition,no peanuts were identified by the author indicating that the applicant has designed and/or complied with the graywater rules descnbed in Hawaii Administrative Rules,Title 11-62- 31 1(g)(1-4), 11-62-27 and plumbing requirements in Hawaii Administrative Rules 3-183 while advertising their"green practices" ii+These discharges, m addition to over a decade of unperrnitted discharged of sewage, pose an additional degradation to the environment Consideration of the proposed action for the addition ofrestroorns and kitchen with proper wastewater disposal infrastructure and permits while unpermitted sewagelgraywater is discharged into the environment is a significant impact to the environment and requires a NO ACTION ruling or outright dismissal of the DEA Water Consumption 25 Water provided by the Department of Water Supply (DWS) is a precious commodity The master water meter servicing the Puakea Ranch subdivision (9 lots) is designed to accommodate a single-family dwelling/parcel DWS allocates 400 gallons per lot per day for a total allotment of 3,600 gallons/day for the subdivision 28 The applicant estimates that their water consumption averages 5,500 gallons per day The daily water consumption by the applicant therefore exceeds the entire water allocation for the subdivision The consumption of water by the applicant on land zoned for agricultural use significantly impacts lot owners planning to build a single residence on lots in the Puakea Ranch subdivision This practice also prejudices other businesses in our community who use their prescribed water allocations The proposed solution by the applicant to use Kohala Ditch Water(not feasible) and/or the construction of a water well are options that have been available to the applicant for the past 12 years but never exercised In response to the gth criteria in §11-20(t 1-13,the applicant states 11 Draft Environir ental Assessment and Anticipated Finding of No Significance Puakea Guest Ranch,July 19,2019 The owners propose to construc7 a septic or enhanced septic system to address the wastewater requirements ofthe project, The primary wastewater needs will befor the proposedrestrooms The system will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements ofthe State Department of/Malik per Hawaii Administrative Rides(11AR), Tide 11 Chapter 62 Wastewater Systems Pg 6 http 1/www paakearanch corn/green practices/[Accessed 9/15/2019] xs §11-200 1-13 Be Individually limited by cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions (Criteria#8) Applicant s response is No adverse impactfrom thepast,present or reasonablyforeseeablefuture actions in such a way as to increase the severity or nature ofimpacts sa Draft Environmental Assessment and Anticipated Finding ofNo Significance Puakea Guest Ranch,July 19 2019 Letter to Christine Cash from Keith Okamoto,Department of Water Supply,December 11, 2018 Appendix la. 5 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 No other adverse impact from the Proposed Action has the potential to accumulate with thoseom the past, present or reasonablyforeseeablefuture action in such a way as to increase the severity or nature ofimpacts The impact of increased water consumption from additional structures,kitchen and bathrooms is clearly cumulative and another clear basis for a NO ACTION determination or outright dismissal of the DEA Noise In the Summary of the Proposed Action,the applicant proposes restricting noise in the daytime (7-10 p m ) to 55 decibels and 10 p m to 7 a m to 45 decibels) at all property lines 27(Normal conversation occurs at around 60 decibels) Previous representations by the applicant on this subject include the following In a Special Permit Application filed in May of 2011 by the applicant,which was subsequently withdrawn, the operator stated"Any amplification devices outdoors would be terminated at 9pm and restricted to State Noise standards for residential uses at the 55 decibel level or less at all property lines at all tunes during daylight hour and 45 decibels during he evening befiore 9pm Please note Standardsfor Agricultural land is 70 decibels day or night In a February 22, 2018 letter to you,the applicant stated that ' We adhere to all county moue laws of55 decibels and no amplified soundpast 10pm" za In Defendants Answer to Plaintiff's First Amended Complaintfor Injunctive Reliefand Damages in the matter of the County ofHawaii v Christine Cash et a , filed on June 10,2019, counsel for plaintiff dentes the County's allegation that the activities at Puakea Ranch have caused unacceptable noise levels to the surrounding properties Numerous submissions and complaints to the County of Hawaii Planning Department contradict these statements and assurances During our meeting with you and Mr Jeff Darrow on October 19, 2017,a recording of musiciscreaming recorded on our property'A mile from a wedding party at the property was played for you and Mr Jeff Darrow You may recall that the words to "Take it Easy"by the musical group the Eagles were clearly audible This recording and others have been submitted to your office Another submission of readings taken from Y2 mile away including a peak reading of 103 decibels from a wedding party measured on Sunday,April 8,2018 29 sz Hawaii Administration of Health,Title 11,Chapter 46,Noise Control,pg 4b-7 xe Letter from Christine Cash to Planning Director Michael Yee,February 22,2018 2'The Poen owl(,Aroflammeiss sandwichensrs)has been sighted throughout our subdivision over the years and is considered sacred to many Hawaiians The Pueo is state listed as Endangered on Oahu The Pueowasmentionedinthewithdrawn2011SpecialPermitapplicationasHawaiianOwl(Pueo)has been sighted flying over the property but there are no signs that the parcel itselfsees as habitatfor these birds It is 6 Planning Director Michael Yee County ofHawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakca Guest Ranch September 17,2019 Given this context, it is implausible that the Beverly Hills owners will honor another noise mitigation proposal which is another reason to issue a NO ACTION determination or the outright dismissal of the DEA Prejudicial Business Practice Applicants response to the 6th cntena in §11-200 1-13 regarding adverse secondary impacts from the proposed action include the following statement Because of the mature ofthe Proposed Action increasing the value ofthe property and Involving more guests and employees realproperty,property,payroll, GETand TAT tax contributions would more than compensatefor extra costs ofpublic services and would enable agencies to improve andexpand their services The author agrees that the Proposed Action will undoubtedly increase the value of the applicant's property at the expense of other lot owners in the Puakea Ranch subdivision The revenue generated from payroll, GET and TAT contributions is unknown to the author Property taxes, however, are public and available (2003-2019) 31 In 2009, Puakea Ranch paid $197 67 32 in property taxes for the 32 41 acre parcel which included four cottages, a luxury treehouse and an Airstream trailer Two swimming pools were also present. Excluding the assessed value of the land in 2009 ($1,169,500) and the value of the swimming pools, the property tax equals $32 94 per rental 33 To my knowledge, the applicant has not informed the County of Hawaii Real Property Tax Assessors office of the numerous structures which are actually on the property which may be due to the absence of building permits unlikely that the current and proposed actions are conducive to the nesting or foraging ofthis bird, especially as it is active during crepuscular periods Nest failure ofthe Pueo due to loud music and light pollution may also be subject to the Migratory Bird Treaty The Paco is not mentioned in the DEA. The wedding contract between Puakea Ranch and Jen Ginter,September 23,2016 directs checks to Christie Cash,456 Lincoln Blvd,Santa Monica,CA 90402 suggesting that income tax is not filed in Hawaii The 2016 Contract specifies Up 10 22 max. adults staving aI Yasshr's House Mlles Away Cowboy House, ,fumes Cottages& Wady On page ui of the DEA the applicant states The maximum occupancy of the vacation rentals would increasefrom 18 to 38 Applicant needs to address this apparent discrepancy between the 2016 contract and 2019 DEA text. 3'hops ilgpublic schne,dcrcorp caml6mgic .aspx?AppID 1048&Layerlt3=23ta1$&PaggTYFeI 4 PageIDd98 78&KeyValue=560010820000 n For context,wife and I live in a single residence on 20 acres and paid$3,991 63 in property taxes in 2009 or about 20 times more than the 32 41 acre Puakea Ranch with structures that had been rented since 2008 n On the Residential Improvement Information listed by the Real Property Tax Office,the four primacy rental cottages were listed as renovated in 19$0(3 cottages)and 1990(one cottage) while they were actually renovated in 2006 and rented by at Least 2007 No documentation was found to indicate that applicant attempt to correct this information 7 Planning Director Michael Yee County ofHawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 In addition to the apparent inequitable property taxes historically paid, the Beverly Hills owners enjoy the economic benefits of avoiding costs associated with the design and filing of building permits, electrical permits, septic permits, grading/excavation permits and special event permits The savings associated with non-compliance when contrasted with businesses who comply, are inconsistent with applicant's statement that the proposed action will more than compensate for the extra costs of public services and would enable agencies to improve and expand their services The adverse effect on the economic, economic welfare, social welfare or cultural practices on the community, County of Hawaii and State are clear The DEA poses a significant impact on the envvironrnent and does not meet the minimum requirements of 11-200 1-13 thereby requiring a NO ACTION ruling or should be dismissed in its entirety Summary Thank you for your consideration of these comments Director Yee I ask that the proposed DEA be dismissed and/or denied in its entirety Ifyou decide to evaluate the DEA on its merits, including the §11-200 1-13 criteria, it fails the minimum requirements thereby requinng a NO ACTION determination Thank you for your consideration of these comments Sincerely yours, Robert Morrison, Ph D TMK 5-6-001-051) P O Box 195 Hawi, HI 96719 In response to applicant's assertations,a recommendation,o the County and State of Hawaii includes the following, (1)direct Corporation Counsel for the County of Hawaii to place a hen on the property and/or collect the accrued fines ofover$345,000,(2)for the County of Hawaii Tax Assessor to assess and collect historical property taxes based on the actual value ofthe property since 2006,(3)assess and collect fines/penalties for the=permitted discharge ofraw sewage into the environment via unpermitted cesspools or directly into the ground and(4)coordinate with SHPD to t,nforce violations that include financial penalties for the numerous violations per§6E-10(c)ofthe Hawaii Historic Preservation Program which specifies a fine not more than$1,000 per violation ofthe provisions with each day ofcontinued violation constituting a distinct and separate offense In aggregate,the collection of these monies would begin to contribute to the extra costs of public services public associa.ed with the applicant's illegal operation Table 1 Review Comments of Draft, Environmental Assessment for Puakea Ranch PART 5. FINDINGS AND SUPPORTING REASONS 1 Chapter 11-200 1-13, Hawaii Administrative Rules, outlines those factors agencies must consider when determining whether an Action has significant effects a In considering the significance of potential environmental effects,agencies shall consider and evaluate the sum ofeffects of the proposed action on the quality ofthe environment. h In determining whether an action may have a significant effect on the environment, the agency shall consider every phase ofa proposed action, the expected impacts, and the proposed mitigation measures In most instances, an action shall be determined to have a significant effect on the environment if it may 1 Irrevocably commit a natural, cultural or historic resource No valuable natural or cultural resources would be committed or lost Histone Sites are beingprotected during adaptive re-use, and no natural resources will be adversely erected 2 Comments The current operation has resulted in an unknown loss of natural and cultural resources in violation of SHPT) and County of Hawaii ordinances resulting m a significant environmental impact Historical examples include the construction of non-permitted structures, including rental cottages, a wedding pavilion, excavations of three unpermitted pools and the non-permitted grading of about 0 25 acres to an unknown depth between August 15, 2010 and June 21, 2012 Given the absence of a detailed archaeological survey or environmental assessment (EA) prior to these and other property alterations, the opportunity for preservation has been irretrievably lost The operations at Puakea Ranch continues to adverse the cultural resources, without prevention/protection, especially via the disposal of uripermitted disposal of sewage (and graywater),neither which are addressed by the applicant While the applicant states that all new construction will undergo SHPD review, no documentation is on file indicating 1 Table 1 is structured using text found on pages 52-54 of the DEA followed by the applicant s in Italics and authors Comments,respectively 2 Applicant's summary statement on page n of the Management Summary of the DEA appears to conimlict this sentence Theproposed development will have an effect on the historic properties within theproject area Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 that the applicant ever notified SHPD after 2009 when the property was placed on the Historic Listing register The proposed expansion is cumulative to these histoncal and on-going damages to the natural and historic resources at this property 2 Curtail the range of beneficial uses of the environment The principal beneficial use ofthe area isfor existing ranch actrvitiec, which will be enhanced, not curtailed, by the Proposed Action Comments The property is not a ranch The word`ranch"is usually defined as a farm where animals such as cattle,sheep,goats and horses are bred and raised The property is an illegal commercial business operating in land zoned by the County and State of Hawaii as agricultural The applicant proposes the expansion of this business for the express purpose ofgenerating income for the Beverly Hills owners The Proposed Action is described by the applicant as follows 3 The proposed development will have an effect on the historic properties within the project area The landowner proposed minimal impacts to the 214 acre project area, consisting of constructing an approximately 2500 sq foot space that contains an American with Disabilities(ADA approved restroom kitchen facility and a space for set up in an enclosed area Existing ranching activities do not require an ADA 2500 square foot bathroom,kitchen facility and a space for set up in an enclosed area The enclosed area text is undefined although in a submittal to Kaiwt Yoon at SHPD on October 24, 2018, the applicant stated Our special permit will include building a new structure that can host 125-seated guests in an enclosed building that will include a catering kitchen, ADA restroorrms and ADA parking 4 A 125-seated guest enclosed building is not needed for ranching operations but is consistent with the expansion of large events From a practical matter,the proposed A Draft Environmental Assessment,July 19,2019 Management Summary,pg u 4 Letter to Christine Cash to Kaiwi Yoon,October 24,2017 Subject Puakea Ranch,Hawaii Register of Historic Places No SO-10-02-9071 Request for Exemption of Environmental Assessment EIS Section 11- 200-8 Exempt classes of action Ch 343,HRS 2 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 construction of these structures and larger party events reduces the availability of land for ranching activities and creates increased disturbance to livestock The enhancement of ranching activities is misleading At the time ofthis submittal, my understandmg is that the livestock on the property consisted oftwo cows (one of which is on a neighbors' property),one old horse and two goats enclosed in a small corral My personal observation is that the large patties held at the property results in stampeding of livestock on the surrounding properties The historical reality is that the unpermitted parties are wide-open events with no control or consideration ofthe neighborhood Given this history, a mitigation plan is required that includes,but not limited to restrictions regarding hosting permitted events on holidays and weekends, alcohol and firearm controllmonitoring and detailed record keeping and submittal procedures to the County of Hawaii Planning Department and Corporation Counsel (in the event ofa violation), by an independent third party present at each event and with the authority to terminate an event, to be paid by applicant Financial and legal (civil and criminal) penalties for violations and detailed procedures for terminating events when any ofthese restrictions are violated are to be included 3 Conflict with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law The State's long-term environmental policies are secforth in Chapter 343, HR. . The broad goals of`this policy are to conserve natural resources and enhance the quality of life The Proposed Action provides guestfacilities and employment while avoiding significant impacts to the environment It is thus consistent with all elements ofthe State's long-term environmental policies Comments The existing illegal operation at Puakea Ranch creates significant impacts to the environmental goals established by law The proposed action simply aggregates this impact via increased traffic, light pollution, noise, the generation ofwastewater, increased water consumptions and the continued violation of State and County ofHawaii laws The proposed action introduces an increased cumulative effect of the existing environmental impacts Guest facilities include unpermitted structures which are the subject of numerous County of Hawaii Planting Department Notice of Violations and Cease & Desist Orders 5 The S County of Hawaii,March 19,2009 Notice of Violation and Order Complaint Operating a Guest Ranch in an Agriculture District. Unpermitted Dwellings in an Agriculture District Order I Immediately Cease and desist from operating the Guest Ranch on the above referenced property 2 Immediately Cease and desist the habitation of any unpermitted dwellings County ofHawaii July 28 20 l8 Subject Notice of 3 Planning Director Michael Yee County ofHawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 applicant has operated the illegal business in violation of County of Hawaii zoning laws since 2009 which are designed, in part,to protect the public (guests) and the environment The enhancement ofthe quality oflife wording in applicant's response is curious as neither the owners nor three contributing consultants to this document live on or are full time residents in our neighborhood The author(s)therefore have no direct knowledge regarding the actual degradation of our quality of life I am a permanent resident of Hawaii,pay Hawaii state income tax (we do not own a second home) and am subjected to the quality of life deterioration over the course of years on a personal level As described in the accompanying letter to this table,decibel readings significantly in excess of55 decibels %mile from parties late into the night and early morning qualify as a degradation of quality of life The provision of employment is misleading as some portion of the catering, photographer, wedding coordinator, musicians, massage therapists, private chefs, etc fees are often paid directly in cash without GE tax 4 Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare,social welfare,or cultural practices of the community and State The Proposed Action will not adversely affect the social welfare ofthe Big Island community or the State ofHawar`r and will contribute to the economy and to the social environment ofthe area The Guest Ranch would assist in maintaining agricultural uses on the property by subsidizing them and providinga built-ria marketfor garden andfarm produce while afro promoting historic preservation. Comments The existing activities at Puakea Ranch already negatively affects the social welfare of our neighborhood The proposed addition ofan enclosed area and kitchenlbathroorns to service transient lodgers and large parties, added traffic concerns, noise and light pollution further degrade our quality of life The illegal operations are not focused on maintaining agricultural uses (or ranching) on the property and promoting historic preservation but rather the continued generation ofrevenue Violation and Order dated March 8,2017 Referencing Warning Letter Dated March 28,2016 Complaint Conducting an Alleged Non-Agriculture Business in an Agriculture Distract Order 1 Immediately cease and desist from operating the Guest Ranch and all of the unpermilted activities on the above referenced property 2 Immediately cease and desist from occupying/using the recreational building for which no approvals from the Planning Department had been panted 3 Immediately Cease sad desist the habitation of any unperioitted structures such as Wally,the airstream trailer on die above referenced property 4 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planoong Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 The social benefit of an unpermitted luxury tree house or Airstream trailer with no septic permits or 12 years of unpermitted sewage discharge from dwellings with no building permits clearly impacts the social and environmental welfare of our area. My persona] experience is that the transient population renting the property have little to no respect for the neighborhood or social environment as evidenced by the noise, blockage of easement to other properties, light pollution, swearing and singing heard from Y2,mile away Previous responses by applicant regarding the discharge of sewage from these parties is that port-a-potties are used. While porta-potties may be present, guests use the bathrooms in or exterior to the unpermitted cottages, such as near Yosht's House,based on my conversations with guests attending these events The net result is that the increased volume of sewage entering cesspools receive sufficient use/volume to qualify as Large Capacity Cesspools by the United States Environmental Protection Agency USEPA)which mcludes the requirement for installing a septic system USEPA non- compliance includes severe financial penalties A detailed proposal is needed to monitor wastewater usage from all permitted events A simple solution is that all bathrooms on the property are locked during these events which insure that guests use the port-a-potties, until such time that the applicant complies with the DOH financial and legal obligations for using unpermitted cesspools The mitigation plan requires a description of the use of an independent third party to monitor compliance and to report any violations,along with the authority to terminate the event. Applicant will pay for this third party which will report all findings to the County ofHawaii Planning Department and Corporation Counsel/USEPA Region 9, in the event of a violation. Historical statements/assurances made by the applicant regarding noise abatement on numerous occasions but not honored, An email from Glenn Schultz ofHawaii Sound& Vision to the applicant on September 28, 2016 nn response to complaints by neighbors to a party is illustrative of the historical context of these events Many ofus have been apart ofweddings at the ranch where the music was atfill volume until midnight(or beyond) without any mention ofan issue Text from a 2016 TripAdvisor Review regarding a wedding on the property contained the following One ofthe main reasons we decided to book this venue was because we were told that ifwe booked the entire ranch, we could play music as late as we'd like to, since there was no neighbors for miles around When we did ourfirst walk through the property in January, Josh [Josh Alt-Ranch Host] stated that one ofthe benefits to a wedding at this location was that the music did not have a curfew Serf-monitored restrictions with no enforcement or civil penalties associated with continued violations, which continue to occur on the property A partial solution to this issue is to require the applicant to submit a detailed noise monitoring program administered by an independent third party and paid by the applicant The monitoring program will consist of multiple real-time decibel monitors placed along the perimeter of the property which are available on-line for neighbors within 1 mile to access At any 5 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakc%Guest Ranch September 17,2019 time that the noise exceeds the 55 decibels (Class A)neighbors will notify the police who will be authorized to shut down the activity causing the noise Given the history of this property, failure to comply with this monrtormg plan will be subject to legal (civil and criminal) and financial penalties, as set forth the County of Hawaii The proposed expansion does not promote histonc (and environmental)preservation as evidenced by the absence of notification violations to SHPD and Department of Health violations (e g , no septic permits, no graywater permits) Puakea Ranch operations do adversely impact the social welfare of our community in addition to prejudicing local businesses who provide similar transient lodgmg services but comply with State and County of Hawaii laws/ordinances 5 Have a substantial adverse effect on public health Na effects to public health are anticipated Water and air quality will he protected through adherence to standard Best Management Practices that will be specified as part ofpermits Comments Puakea Ranch currently violates wastewater discharge ordinances,via the discharge of sewage from unpermitted and/or non-existent cesspools The discharge of graywater is also illegally discharged by the applicant Neither of these examples constitute Best Management Practices of the existing operation The DEA is silent regarding these existing violations and continued degradation of the environment Water consumption for this illegal operation m land zoned by the State and County of Hawaii will be increased, despite the applicant's assurances that Kohala Ditch Water (not possible) or the installation of groundwater well For 12 years the applicant has consumed increased volumes ofwater in excess of the entire allocation for the Puakea Ranch subdivision (9 lots)without any attempt to supplement or decrease their consumption (e g , the construction and additions of three pools) Adding to this existing situation with increased water consumption via additional rentals,a kitchen, and restrooms accelerates this consumption of this resource for commercial,not agricultural, purposes 6 Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities No adverse secondary effects such as increasedpopulation or substantial additional demandfrom government services, are expected to resultfrom the Guest Ranch. Because ofthe nature ofthe Proposed Action increasing the value ofthe properly and involving more guests and employees real property,payroll, GET and TAT tear contributions would more than compensatefor extra costs ofpublic services and would also enable agencies to improve and expand their services 6 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review ofDraft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 Comments The proposed action is and will continue to adversely impact the public domain The nature of the Proposed Action only increases the value of the property for the Beverly Hills owners while decreasing the value and quality of life ofthe neighbors Property values and the ability to sell adjacent properties are already impacted because lot owners purchased their properties with the expressed desire to live in land zoned for agricultural use The applicant violated these County of Hawaii zoning laws by operating a commercial business on this property Property taxes paid by the applicant do not appear to be equitable nor has the applicant borne the costs associated with building, plumbing, electrical and wastewater permits thereby creating an unfair economic advantage to businesses that comply with County and State laws There is no evidence that the extra costs to public services are improved and/or expanded in any manner via the illegal operation ofPuakea Ranch 7 Involve a substantwl degradation ofenvironmental quality The Proposed Action is raking place tri a general area already impacted by ranching, vacation rentals and rural residential activities and is being regulated by permits to avoid environmental degradation and thus would not contribute to environmental degradation. Comments There have been no complaints to me by neighbors regarding impacts from ranching, other than an occasional cow walking along our subdivision road The reason that lot owners, other than the applicant, purchased lots is to experience the quality of life provided by land zoned by the State and County of Hawaii as agricultural With the exception of applicant's property,there are no vacation rentals on the remaining 8 lots comprising the Puakea Ranch subdivision There are no vacation rentals on the 76 acre parcel north and adjacent to Puakea Ranch (Parcel 11)560010810000) There are no vacation rentals at the Puakea Bay subdivision located directly west ofthe subject property There are no vacation rentals located m the Ranches at Puakea subdivision located southwest of the subject property There are no vacation rentals on the 750 acre cattle ranch (Kukuipahu Cattle Company, LLC) located adjacent and south of the Puakea Ranch subdivision The reference to rural residential activities is perplexing Other than the applicant's operation, the Puakea Ranch subdivision is a quiet, peaceful location and setting I know e Letter to Planning Director Michael Yee from Howard B Keck,November 20, 2017 1 urge the County ofFtawaii Planning Department to enforce agricultural zoning laws and building codes Howard B Keck,Jr Kaikrrapdw Collie Conipurry 7 Planning Director Michael Yee County ofHawaii Planning Department Review ofDraft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 ofno complaints regarding the use of tractor mowers or passenger vehicles that slowly drive along the subdivision or easement roads The reference to" being regulated by permits to avoid environmental degradation and thus would not contribute to environmental degradation"is confusing as other residents in our subdivision comply with County and State of Hawaii laws/ordinances Given the absence ofthe permits required by many ofthe laws,the applicant has avoided safeguarding the environment as well as posing a risk to those renting and/or habituating the unpermitted structures at the property To my knowledge,the only lot owner in our subdivision not adhering to these same requirements is the applicant. 8 Be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions Traffic impacts will have a non-negligible but very minor impact cm cumulative traffic operations No other adverse impact from the Proposed Action has the potential to accumulate with those from the past,present or reasonablyforeseeablefuture actions in such a way as to increase the severity or nature ofimpacts Comments The cumulative impacts of the proposed action includes not only additional vehicles and the potential for easement blockage by vehicles,greater light and pollution with more people on the property,greater discharge of sewage and/or wastewater into the ground and increased consumption of County water,all of which are cumulative and negatively impact the environment The existing events already create traffic issues, including blockage of easements for other lot owners which have been extensively documented to the County ofHawaii Planning Department At a minimum the applicant needs to submit a detailed traffic monitonng plan that includes restrictions on the number of vehicles allowed onto the property,mitigation measures to eliminate the impact ofthese vehicles on the native habitat and to include detailed ADA compliant information(signage,parking lanes, ramps, etc Financial and legal (civil and criminal) penalties require inclusion for allowing vehicles to block easements,park randomly throughout the property and for violating the number of vehicles that enter the property The mitigation measure to include an independent third party who monitors any violation to the restrictions in the mitigation plan and who submits detailed written reports to the County of Hawaii for each permitted event 9 Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare,threatened or endangered species, or its habitat 8 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September 17,2019 The property supports overwhelmingly alien vegetation With standard mitigation on timing ofvegetation removal to protect Hawaiian hoary bats, impacts to rare threatened or endangered species ofora orfaun will not occur Comments No ngorous plan is provided by the applicant to protect the Hawaiian hoary bat, in terms ofmonitonng, enforcement and penalties The proposed mitigation of the Hawaiian hoary bat is inadequate A detailed mitigation measure that includes an initial baseline survey and documentation of the vegetation prior to June 1 and at one-week intervals through September 15 is required Any violation of this restriction in the mitigation plan will provide detailed language concerning the legal and financial penalties as set forth by the County ofHawaii for violation ofthis monitoring program The mitigation plan will contain the inclusion of an independent third party representative of the County of Hawaii who will prepare the initial baseline survey, subsequent surveys and submit detailed reports citing any violations to ensure compliance A second and more realistic solution is for the applicant to honor all ofthe Cease & Desist orders, including rentals and party/wedding events The Pueo owl is not mentioned in the DEA although it was identified in the applicant's 2011 Special permit application which was subsequently withdrawn ?The Pueo owl has been sighted throughout our neighborhood_ The impacts on its nesting and hunting in the evening/early morning requires study to understand the impact ofparties and noise on the it While not considered an endangered species on the big Island, it is considered sacred to many native Hawaiians who recognize it as a Hawaiian ancestral guardian known as attmaktia" The Pueo owl is believed to protect individuals from harm and even death The impact ofthe illegal activities and especially the risk of fires which can quickly eliminate the habitat of the hoary bat and Pueo owl is not detailed. The impact of hundreds of people on the property partying into the night along with amplified music, lights,noise and vehicle exhaust on the Hawaiian hoary batlPuelo owl is not addressed and is needed in the mitigation program, specifically detailing the impact of decibel readings in excess of 100 measured on neighboring properties on the habitat of these birds on the property and neighborhood 10 Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels The Guest Ranch would not be expected to have more than a negligible impact on air quality or water quality either during the minor scale ofconstruction or during operation. Construction and operation would generate at least some level ofnoise, although the long distance to any sensitive receptors is in itselfa mitigatingfactor 7 Special Use Permit Application-Pi akea Ranch,May 26 2011 Har variari Owl(Fire))has been sightedflying over the property but there are no signs that the parcel itselfserves as a habitatfor these birth 9 Planning Director Michael Yee ti County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Pualkca Guest Ranch September 17, 2019 Construction plansfrom the contractor will be reviewed by DOH to determine if mitigation is required during construction The layout ofactrvrrres that have the potential to cause noise, plus restrictions on the scale and timing ofvarious activities, should combine to reduce noise impacts at the property line to levels permissible in residential districts, which are much stricter than applicable agricultural standards that would apply for land use as a ranch orfarm Comments The response to this crttenurn only addresses the air quality, water quality and noise issues m the proposed action while silent on addressing the historical and existing environmental degradation. The existing illegal operation already adversely the environment, proposing mitigating measures during the construction ofthe proposed structures while ignoring the existing unpermitted strictures, zoning violations,building code violations, septic permit violations,etc does not address the existing significant environmental impact of this illegal operation 11 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 nse exposure area, beach, erosion-prone area, geologically hazardous land, estuary, fresh water,or coastal waters Although the Proposed Action is located in an area with seismic risk the entire Island of Hawaii shares this risk and the Proposed Action is not imprudent to implement The property u not vulnerable to overland or stream flooding and is set at over 500feet in elevation Consultation ofthe Hawai"i Sea Level Rise Vulnerability andAdaptation Report and supporting Viewer indicate no risk ofinundation due to sea level rise Uncertainties regarding regional circulation make it possible that climate change may lead to drier rather than welter conditions, increasing wildfire risk Ifthis occurs, theprecautions to prevent and adapt to wildfire risk that are proposed as part ofthe Proposed Action will help mitigate addidonal potential risk Comments Our neighborhood currently is at risk for fire, given the extremely dry conditions of the pasture area The proposal ofmitigation efforts to minimize the risk of wildfires is curious given the historical use of sparklers and fire lanterns at wedding events1'parties My understanding(may be incorrect) is that applicant has reused to allow inspectors from the County of Hawaii Fire Department to inspect the property While the proposed action indicates that a water tank, etc will be installed,the applicant has operated without any of these precautions for the past 12 years,thereby placing risk of fire to adjacent Vuakea Ranch subdivision owners I0 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch September l7,2019 Given this history, the applicant needs to submit a detailed monitoring program for all events, along with all the necessary permits, notification to neighbors one week in advance located within 1 mile of the property, the number ofpeople to attend, the duration of the event, a list of all vendors servicing the event and their GET license and detailed mitigation measures in place to prevent fires The mitigation plan must include significant legal (civil and criminal)and financial penalties for failure to submit or comply with this monitoring program,to be administered by a third party identified by the County of Hawaii and paid by the applicant 12 Have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and view planes, during day or night, identified in county or state plans or studies The Proposed Action is low-key and contained within an existing developed area and will hare no impact on protected scenic view planes, including views from Akonr Pule Highway of(or2) the mountains Comments The applicant, nor the three consultants permanently reside on or within miles ofthe subject property As a permanent resident since 2006, the current activities at Puakea Ranch are rios low-key Any expansion of these activities simply aggregates the continuing quality of life degradation The terra existing developed area is misleading Puakea Ranch is surrounded by parcels on two sides with cattle ranching while the third adjoining lot consists ofa single residence with cattle Light pollution from parties and other activities are significant and degrade the night sky Complaints and photos of this pollution have been submitted to the County of Hawaii Planning Department over the years Despite assurances by the applicant regarding mitigation of light pollution, the practice continues While not strictly germane to this criterium, the unpermitted wedding chapel is believed to violate the set-back of buildings from property lines on ag land as summarized in my letter to you on October 21,2017 During my meeting with you and Mr Jeff Darrow on October 19, 2017 you mentioned that during your tour with the applicant m her golf cart about one month before our meeting that you discussed the set-back issue with the applicant (30 feet required) The applicant is aware of this potential issue and to myknowledge, no action has been taken to resolve this violation 13 Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases Negligible amounts ofenemy input and greenhouse gas emissions are requiredfor the ProposedAction construction and operation. The modest scale keep. it well within HELCO's capacity and no major adverse effects to energy consumption would be expected The Proposed Action's design will include photovoltaic solar, energy efficient 11 Planning Director Michael Yee County ofHawaii Planning Department Review ofDraft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Kniest Ranch September 17,2019 SII hghttragfixtures, low water usefixtures, and low water use landscaping, which reduce energy use Comments The proposed use of low water use fixtures and low water use landscaping are at odds with the wanton use of a business with hot tubs and three swimming pools Additional water usage from a large kitchen and restrooms S are inconsequential to any waste savings from the use of low water use landscaping As stated earlier,obtaining water from the Kohala Ditch is not possible while my understanding ofthe cost of drilling the groundwater well at the Ranches of Puakea, located about 300 feet west of the subject property, cost about one million dollars Of note, it is likely that the applicant has not either invested in drilling a groundwater well or obtained Kohala Ditch Water dunng the past 12 years of rental operations for this reason The Puakea Ranch webpage includes the following text c` Gray Water Recycling. Gray water- wastewater composed of wash water from the kitchen,bathrooms sinks and showers/tubs, laundry sinks and tubs, and washing machines (clothes and dish)where only non-polluting, biodegradable soaps are used is recycled for watering gardens and landscaping It is filtered through the soil on its way to ground and subterranean water sources This reduces the amount of fresh water needed for that purpose No permits 10 or State of Hawaii Department Health Wastewater Recycled Water Application Form for either General Irrigation or Agricultural irrigation filed by applicant has been identified No information indicates the applicant has designed and/or complied with the graywater rules described inn Hawaii Administrative Rules, Title 11-62- 31 1(g)(1-4), 11-62-27 it If a correct interpretation, the applicant will be required to use more water for landscaping purposes i while the water consumption of the proposed ADA kitchen is unknown for context,a typical sit-down restaw nt uses 3,000 to 7,000 gallons per day,with an average of about 5 WO 11tms JLKivcr housedynamics com/resourcestwhrte-papers/water-water-everywhere-and-L 0-ways-irstaurants-stem-flow/ http /Ywww. ak arar,ch comrgreen-practice [Accessed on 9-13-2019] 70§183 13 1603 0 Permit or Approval it shall be unlawful for any person to construct, install,or alter,or cause to be constructed,installed,or altered any gray water system in a building or on a premises withoutfirstobtainingapermitorapprovaltodosuchworkfronstheauthorityhavingjurisdiction §11-62-27 Recycled water systems (a)No recycled water system shall be constructed,used,or modified without wntten approval by the director1tHawaiiAdmnisirativeRulesTitle11DepartmentofHealthWastewaterSystemsSubchapter1 Prohibitions and General Requirements §11-62-31 1,pgs 62-54 to 55 My understanding is that non- compliance with these rules,including issues regarding wastewater disposal systems,includes civil and criminal penalties for noncompliance (pg, 62-A-11) 12 1] Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department Review of Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)far Puakea Guest Ranch September 17.2019 The disposal of graywater into the environment described by applicant on the PuakeaRanch corn webpage obviously further impacts the natural resources at the property The duration for which the practice ofgiaywater discharge has occurred is unknown by the author A detailed mitigation plan is needed to monitor, prevent and enforce the excessive light pollution form the property, especially during the partieslweddmgs, etc The mitigation plan will include detailed procedures for enforcement, including termination of an event/patty procedures, requirement for a rental guest to vacate a rental dwelling the for light pollution (e g, leaving lights on all night which I personally observe from 1/x mile away and the apparent disregard ofthe electrical resources of our community), termination of an event ifthe lighting presents a hazard to identified wildlife affected by such activities and strict financial and legal penalties per violated event(i e ,light from the wedding chapel is one event, lights from a cottage one event, lights strung along the driveway to Yosht's Cottage one event, etc) 13 QC 0 i9 FE? 18 Pr ' 57 o 1. J U Q m ii 0W 4cr L ru w5 g a ....— co 1 i Iv} rw00,,,,c ocal ft40in 31. 0 Ian 56-z8VIAKONI PULE HIGHWAY HAW', HAWACI 9671) 808.315.0805 WWW.PUAKEARANCH.COM November 1,2019 Robert Morrison,PhD PO BOX 195 Hawi,HI 96719 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala,Island ofHawaii Dear Dr.Morrison: Thank you for your comment letter dated September 17,2019,in which you stated a number ofconcerns including the current enforcement action,cultural and historical resources,wastewater disposal,water consumption,noise,and prejudicial business practices. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision,please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements,the share ofwater each lot gets and the use ofwater,and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs.While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts ofthese matters and whether there are any actual issues,we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion.However,these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment,the community,or other resources.They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment(EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below,along with our responses to each: 1. County ofHawari enforcement action The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application.Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes(HRS)Chapter 343 process,a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission.We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Cultural and historical resources We acknowledge your comment regarding cultural and historical resources and share your concerns.We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout 1 including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 of the EA. In addition,the Hawai`i State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process.An example ofthat is demonstrated in Appendix 4. 3. Wastewater disposal We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater,specifically the existing systems. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA.Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements ofthe State Department of Health,per Hawaii Administrative Rules(HAR),Title 11,Chapter 62,"Wastewater Systems."In addition,we anticipate coordinating any upgrades to the existing systems as part ofthe permitting process moving forward.Do note,that a property of this size is allowed through Chapter 62 to incorporate multiple individual wastewater systems. It is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive,with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface ground water. In addition,portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent,large events, and that therefore the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use. 4. Water consumption We acknowledge your comment regarding water usage. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA.In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination ofthese sources ofwater will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors.As a user ofthe current shared water system, you should be aware that our water meter is the original meter before the subdivision.A water line runs from our meter up to the two lots mauka. Therefore any and all leaks between our meter and the other two individual meters will all be recorded on the usage readings for our lot.We plan to address this poorly conceived layout ofa system that may not have been installed properly and suffers from constant leaks in the immediate future.This will ensure Lot 1 no longer carries the expense burden from leaks servicing other lots. S. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA.We have responded to this concern as part ofthe design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. 6. Businesspractices We acknowledge your comment regarding business practices,specifically related to property taxes,assessments and permit fees. To our knowledge all taxes have been paid according to law and it is our intention to continue that practice.Additionally,we plan to comply with all required permit and application fees throughout this process.This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA.However,as quoted,we do state how our tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs ofpublic services in Section 3.3.1 ofthe EA. We very much appreciate your review ofthe document.Your annotated letter demonstrates a high level of engagement,which we appreciate. Please see below our responses to each of your comments contained in Table 1 to your comment letter. 1. Irrevocably commit a natural,cultural or historic resource. The owner has been working with SHPD throughout this process as explained above specifically to prevent the loss of natural and cultural resources. Also,as explained above,wastewater disposal will be designed and constructed in accordance with Department of Health requirements. 2 2. Curtail the range ofbeneficial uses ofthe environment. Please note,the owner,Christie Cash,is a resident ofthe State ofHawaii and is from Chicago,Illinois. It is obvious that you are trying to prejudice others against her by referring to her as a"Beverly Hills Owner"— please stop spreading untruthful information. The owner is in fact conducting agricultural activities on the property,including the raising of crops,such as fresh eggs,pineapple,mango,mac nuts,lilikoi,dragon fruit,basil,cilantro and a huge vegetable garden that the guests and staff enjoy and is sold at the farmers market when extra is available. The Proposed Action is in line with enhancing the agricultural activities by aggressively expanding our lavender and pineapple farm as well as a creating a means to preserve the historic property. 3. Conflict with the State's environmental policies or long-term environmental goals established by law. As detailed in the EA,the Proposed Action is consistent with the State's long-term environmental policies and includes various mitigation measures that will be undertaken to the extent necessary. The owner has submitted this EA as part of the Special Permit Application process. The Proposed Action will enhance the quality of life for not only the surrounding residents but also the Hawaii community as a whole by allowing for the operational preservation of this significant cultural and historic property,which will be available to the community for continued enjoyment. 4. Have a substantial adverse effect on the economic welfare, social welfare,or cultural practices of the community and State. Responses to your general concerns about wastewater,noise,and event control are all detailed in the EA and also set forth above. More specifically,however,the current operations promote the economy by employing one full time and five part time employees.Not to mention all the other vendors who profit from and fuel the economy like the local coffee grower,who's coffee is supplied to the guests or the local private chefs who come in and cook for the guests with produce from the gardens. Puakea Ranch guests shop at the main street stores, eat at the restaurants and pay for the local activates. Moreover,the owner has generously hosted a number of community events including,without limitation:Mo`okini Heiau Children's Day,Waimea Country School,Par- ker School campout,HPA School Grad Nights,North Kohala Community Resource Center fundraiser the annu- al North Kohala Seniors Club Luncheon, and countless donations to other like the North Kohala Hospital fund- raiser,Kona&Waimea Hospices fundraisers,Waimea Ocean Film Festival,The Kohala 4 H Club and the North Kohala Student Cultural Enrichment Program. The Proposed Action will continue to,and further enhance,the owner's ability to contribute to the Hawaii economy and social welfare. 5. Have a substantial adverse effect on public health. Responses to your general concerns about wastewater and water consumption are all detailed in the EA and also set forth above. While the owner denies the accusation that the property is currently violating wastewater laws, the Proposed Action would allow for the curing of any such violations,if any. 6. Involve adverse secondary impacts, such as population changes or effects on public facilities. Responses to your general concerns about business practices and taxes are all detailed in the EA and also set forth above. The concern about your property value is unrelated to population changes or effects on public facilities. The accusation that the Proposed Action will negatively impact property values does not appear to be supported by a professional appraisal,but rather is merely speculative. Considering your property is a halfa mile from Puakea Ranch,it is difficult to understand how the proposed action would have any impact on your property or property value in any way except positive. 3 The Proposed Action will have a positive effect on public facilities in that it will enable the ranch to undertake a number ofADA renovations,thus enabling more of the public to enjoy the facilities. This is incredibly valuable as most working ranches and farm operations are quite inaccessible to the handicapped population. 7. Involve a substantial degradation of environmental quality. The property is permitted to operate as a short-term vacation rental. This is not an illegal use. This legal nonconforming use was confirmed by the County Planning Department in its letter dated September 30,2019. While there may not be other short-term vacation rentals within the 9 lot subdivision,there are only 4 developed lots in the 9 lot subdivision.And,there certainly are a number ofbed and breakfast operations as well as event venues for weddings and other celebratory events in the community,operating without all the necessary permits. It is disingenuous to characterize the property's operations as unique when other property owners are essentially carrying on the same conduct in our community on Agriculture parcels including but not limited to the"Starseed Ranch"offering STVR,Weddings,Farm to Table events,yoga retreats etc.without a special permit. http://www.starseedranchevents.com/ https://www.eventyas.com/US/Kapaau/2294924207454517/$tarseed-Ranch-Events The Hawaii Island Retreat does not have a specific permit to host weddings and large events,yet they do. The Hawi Plantation House is a B&B offering weddings. To my knowledge B&B's are not permitted to host weddings and events and are limited to 10 total guests per night. 8. Be individually limited but cumulatively have substantial adverse effect upon the environment or involves a commitment for larger actions. Responses to your general concerns about wastewater and water consumption are all detailed in the EA and also set forth above. We acknowledge your comment regarding traffic.This is addressed in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. Thank you for sharing the concern regarding onsite access.Any legal access rights will not be hindered. This information has been added to the Final EA(FEA). We acknowledge your comment regarding light pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 of the EA. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County ofHawaii Outdoor Lighting Ordinance Hawai`i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. Please note light emanating from your property specifically can be seen at night.Further more,when the three lots in back of lots 4,6&8 are developed,you will have a lot more light to contend with than the lot 1,a%2 mile away from your property. 9. Have a substantial adverse effect on a rare,threatened or endangered species,or its habitat. We thank you for noting the presence ofthe Hawaiian Aunt eared owl(Asio flammeus sandwichensis).We are aware of the presence of this species and it will not be affected by any current or proposed activities.Although the species is not protected on Hawaii Island under the Endangered Species Act,we value and appreciate the Pueo. As noted in Section 3.1.4 of the EA,the Hawaiian hoary bat(Lasiurus cinereus semotus)has been observed in almost all parts ofthe island ofHawaii. Considering the existing environment with no natural vegetation and the minor nature of planned improvements to the flora,the Proposed Action will produce almost no impacts to flora or fauna. Nonetheless,however,mitigation measures,as outlined in the EA,will be undertaken by the owner. 4 I 10. Have a substantial adverse effect on air or water quality or ambient noise levels. Your comment here focuses on the current unpermitted nature ofthe operations. As you know,the owner has been trying to obtain a special permit for a number ofyears now. This EA is a part ofthat process. The dogs barking on your lot 4 and Lot 6 present a substantial noise annoyance nightly,disrupting the ambient noise levels. 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. We acknowledge your comment regarding fire and share the general concern ofhuman caused events. As such we enforce a strict no open flame rule with all guests.Additionally all campfires are prearranged and managed by Puakea Ranch staff,not permitted in dry or windy conditions,only allowed inside a fire ring next to hose in close proximity.Guests are not allowed to start any fires.This is addressed in Section 3.1.2 of the EA. 11. Have a substantial adverse effect on scenic vistas and view planes,during day or night,identified in country or state plans or studies. Your comment regarding light pollution is addressed in#8 above. There is no wedding chapel on the property. Assuming you are referring to the recently partially-constructed pavilion,the EA addresses the completion of the pavilion in compliance with Building Code and permitting requirements. 12. Require substantial energy consumption or emit substantial greenhouse gases. Responses to your general concerns about wastewater and water consumption are all detailed in the EA and also set forth above. We look forward to working with you to cooperatively address your concerns and welcome the opportunity to draft a mitigation plan as you propose in your letter. Ifyou have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808)315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@ haweiicounty.gov only] 5 September 18,2019 2119 SEP 2n Pfl 2 02 PLAN; I.' ' ^fii r{1f3-NARNT r .'' . COUNTY OF- HAWAII Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Dept. 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Hilo,HI 96720 RE: Review and Public comments to the Draft Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala District,Island of Hawaii Dear Planning Director Yee: Thank you for providing the opportunity for us to respond to the DEA request by Ms.Christine Cash,Puakea Ranch, Lot 1,TMK(3)5-6-001:082. We have received and reviewed the subject document and strongly support the denial and/or dismissal ofthe requested DEA along with a finding of NO ACTION by the County Planning Department and not granting a FONSI. Many reasons have brought us to this conclusion,and we appreciate the opportunity to express our thoughts in this response. There are significant environmental concerns regarding the disposal of sewage on Lot 1. The applicant has not filed appropriate permits for existing cesspools and has been illegally disposing of sewage for the past 12 years. By dumping sewage into unpermitted receptacles has shown disrespect to the Hawaii County,the community and the historical land Lot 1 resides on. Historical and cultural land is protected by permitting regulations and Puakea Guest Ranch has ignored these regulations in the past which has resulted in unmeasurable damage to the land. The expansion of Puakea Guest Ranch will significantly increase water consumption and is unsupported by the Hawaii Department of Water Supply. Water usage,leaks and unpaid bills by Lott impact the remaining 8 lot owners. Another reason to deny the DEA. Noise and Traffic are glaring issues with considering the expansion of Lot 1. Puakea Ranch subdivision CCR's strictly prohibit operating a business that encroaches on the liberties of our neighbors,which would include noise and traffic violations. Parties at Puakea Guest Ranch have been so loud we have felt like we were attending the event,or in the Di booth,as we were sitting in our living room. We reside on agricultural land to be free of excessive noise,traffic and light pollution. The applicant does not possess equivalent values,as expressed by historical actions. Traffic and parking on the property increase maintenance costs of the access road to residential lots adjacent to Lot 1. Agricultural land should be used for agricultural purposes not generating revenue from a special event venue. Puakea Guest Ranch's primary purpose is not agricultural with agricultural concerns. If the DEA is considered there will be significant increase in noise,light and environmental pollution of the land on which we reside as farmers,ranchers and residents. The applicant states that the increased property value of the subject property will create more GET and TAT taxes and increased monies to the County of Hawaii so more services can be provided. The applicant has taken advantage of the County by not adhering to regulations in t:he past,to include not paying adequate property taxes. The applicant is requesting to expand an already illegal operation. What indicates the applicant will be adhere to regulations moving forward? This is another reason to deny the DEA and not grant a FONSI. We find it premature to proceed with a DEA when the subject property is currently involved in a legal dispute with the County of Hawaii for unpermitted structures and illegal activities. Proceeding with the DEA expands the illegal activities that currently exist and are unresolved;such as payment of accrued fines of over$350,000 and any 127956 imposed injunctions. We support the denial of the DEA and No Action(not granting a FONSI)by the Planning Committee. Mahalo to you,Mr.Yee,and the committee for taking the time to read and consider our comments. We are confident you will come to the conclusion to preserve our land for its intended purpose.Aloha. Air IY. I/ cct _ ` 'i i II 4#0, Doug and Pat icia Lenhoff BX 198900 #320 Hawi,HI 96719 Member Managers Aloha Aina,LLC Owner Lot 6 Puakea Ranch Subdivision 1 I i e 0 I a.Ul)CI? Id OCC 01%Z,71 I-1- a) ii CA 1Outco-Z i .04CcoluM cm , 7. i Mu_Mcocn4C cc 4- k Z. i p- s I1 m, ...... .... ! mew. 1 i k 1 a I 8m .... 4 7. 1------ CL 1 . r„, • 1247 _.-.. r..11.... c0 1 cra simm ...co n,42a- "' 01 1.• ••• Jul••1 L.. _ 1Ezle070 281Ift... MINIIMINIMIIII ..13 2 •1--. 0CI --' Ir m U) 1-42ICZrnimili ...nhtiI-I 2,g Ila iiimminiim N 1 to 0 g 02 14 leo- 4- (0 x xl W w INIMININIIIMMIMIMI CI C = 1-1 Cf)f.r/11_.u)I1.11.1 11111M111111111111•11M cl2 1iftimm IMMINIMIMMINNIIMIM MN Ct. I.) ‘--i 2 0 2 8 114; ..... .. ......! te IE IN...„ . ............ ... ..... i P- 6 5 5:Ionia ,.... .......... L..72. c tn IT,iCC ••• ••••• Lilti i 01 i7,111 IIoihi lonnommir rut6::1EN . .............. 5,o I 77 cc 4 1.f,7: mmonammonns ra r I,I, .11MIIINIMI 0 r- t A 11.'1',,,,, 0 a, rn 1....tr) IVAAV-1-1 -10 ,,111110`,) 0 CT) cD, IN31ALLUVII 3f.! :.",1:1i 4NPIid 4- CO 1 . .'C 0,/ ZU Z Wd ti- d $ 61U J xCO = November 1, 2019 Doug and Patricia Lenhoff Aloha Aina, LLC PO BOX 198900 #320 Hawi, HI 96719 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island ofHawai`i Dear Lenhoffs: Thank you for your comment letter dated September 18, 2019, in which you stated a number of environmental concerns including the disposal of sewage,historical and cultural land, water consumption,noise and traffic, light pollution, property taxes and the current enforcement action. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision,please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements,the share of water each lot gets and the use of water, and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs. While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts ofthese matters and whether there are any actual issues, we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion. However,these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment,the community, or other resources. They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. Wastewater disposal We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater, specifically disposal. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health,per Hawaii Administrative Rules HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems." In addition,we anticipate coordinating any upgrades to the existing systems as part of the permitting process moving forward. Do note,that a property of this size is allowed through Chapter 62 to incorporate multiple individual wastewater systems. It is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive, with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface ground water. In addition,portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent, large events, and that therefore the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use. 2. Cultural and historical resources We acknowledge your comment regarding cultural and historical resources and share your concerns. We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's 1 architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 ofthe EA. In addition,the Hawai`i State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process. An example of that is demonstrated in Appendix 4. 3. Water usage We acknowledge your comment regarding water consumption. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA. In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination of these sources ofwater will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors. As a user of the current shared water system,you should be aware that our water meter is the original meter before the subdivision. A water line runs from our meter up to the two lots mauka. Therefore any and all leaks between our meter and the other two individual meters will all be recorded on the usage readings for our lot. We plan to address this poorly conceived layout of a system that may not have been installed properly and suffers from constant leaks in the immediate future. This will ensure Lot 1 no longer carries the expense burden from leaks servicing other lots. 4. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. Furthermore, there are appropriate legal remedies regarding the enforcement of noise violations. This is covered in Hawai`i Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control." In addition, the State Department of Health maintains reference to describe various kinds of noise,their sources and who you should contact to resolve the problem. Please note that dogs barking on your lot 6 & 8 can be heard all night, disrupting the ambient sounds at night and your dogs frequently get loose and have been on lot 1 on 4 occasions where we saw them and ran them back to ward your property. S. Traffic We acknowledge your comment regarding traffic. This is addressed in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. Thank you for sharing the concern regarding maintenance costs. This information has been added to the Final EA (FEA). 6. Light pollution We acknowledge your comment regarding light pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 of the EA. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County of Hawai`i Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai`i County Code Chapter 9, Article 14), which requires shielding of exterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. Ambient light is also visible from your property at night from lot 1. 7. Taxes 2 We acknowledge your comment regarding taxes, specifically related to property taxes. To our knowledge all taxes have been paid according to law and it is our intention to continue that practice. This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA. However, we do state how our tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. 8. County ofHawaii enforcement action The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. We very much appreciate your review ofthe document. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 3 Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael c..co Sent: Saturday,September 21, 2019 12:44 PM rn -To: Mori,Ashley ry L.Cc:Ley, Rachelle wSubject: FW:Comments on Proposed Land Use Variance for Puakea Guest Ranc TMK(3) 5-6-001:082 North Kohala District, Big Island. a Please intake to Jeff i From: Peggy Brevoort[mailto:peggbre@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, September 20, 2019 11:51 AM To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject:Comments on Proposed Land Use Variance for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3)5-6-001:082 North Kohala District, Big Island. Dear Mr Yee I am writing with my concerns about this proposed variance. I live at Puakea Bay Ranch across the highway and have been a tax paying resident of Hawaii since 2002. One of my neighbors has taken the time to research this and alert me to the issue. I am using much of her wording below, because I couldn'tsayitbettermyself. Having commercial activity in an Agricultural area will make it easier for others to do the same thing and we couldhavemanymoreshorttermrentalsandcommercialbusinessestoaddtothiswhichwillchangethenatureofour community. The worrying aspect is that this DEA actually includes a new building capable of seating 125 along with a kitchen and ADA bathrooms-most ranches don't have these facilities as well as a Wedding Chapel Firstly the DEA should be denied or dismissed until the County ofHawaii V Christine Cash et al Litigation is resolved. In the West Hawaii Today article published just before our annual meeting on 17 January 2019. In the article she claims that the vacation rental that she has run for the last twelve years is completely legal. By calling this a guest ranch it seems that the new regulations on short term rentals(Bill 108) do not apply. So, other than the name change it will be business as usual BUT commercial uses are not allowed unless it is permitted and this weddingbusinessisclearlyacommercialactivity. Back in 2009 March 19th, a Notice of Violation was issued by the County of Planning Department ordering the applicant to cease and desist unpermifted activities , despite this the business has expanded with construction of additional unpermitted building . Further expansion and new buildings are proposed increase short term rentals from 18 people to 38-i.e. more than double in an Agricultural zone along with a covered seated area for>100 people. Property taxes The TMK tax record is a matter of public record, in 2009 the business paid$197.67 in property taxes for the entire 32.4 acres,which included four improved cottages, a luxury tree house and an Airstream trailer and two unpermitted swimming pools.All of the other new structures built on the property are not on the TMK records as usually there are no building permits . This means that the owners have also had the benefits of not paying for 1 127957 building permits for the cottages, pools, septic tanks, grading and excavation and special event permits. In 2012 the property tax was $249.67, In 2018 the tax bill is still only$4681.55. The detail of the environmental assessment covers 13 criteria and a lot of detail , the major points are: Cultural and Historical Resourses The application to SHPD for listing on the State Historical Register was granted in August 2009. Additional structures unrelated to the historical operation of Puakea Ranch, including a tree house(an actual house with kitchen and bathroom, not a play structure,)two unpermitted swimming pools were not disclosed and the application did not cover the extensive renovations of the cottages on property. Unpermitted Disposal of Sewerage The applicant has discharged sewerage from at least 6 cesspools into our environment for at least 12 years, there is one permit for a cesspool at Yoshi's house in 2006. The discharge of unpermitted sewage for over 10 years is a little more important to the environment than ranch guests using their towels for more than one day. There is no evidence that any gray water rules and plumbing requirements described in Hawaii's Administrative Rules have been compiled with so the 'green practices ' claimed on the website may not stand up to scrutiny. Water Consumption The master water meter for the Puakea Ranch subdivision of 9 lots is designed for 400 gallons per day for each lot, it is highly likely that the consumption of water at this one site far exceeds the allocation for the entire subdivision. Construction of a new area and commercial kitchen and bathrooms could lead to future water shortages for all the other residents. Noise and light pollution In the summary the applicant proposes restricting the noise level to 55 decibels on all property lines-normal speech is around 60 decibels. Numerous complaints from neighbors half a mile away and have been ignored. Noise is heard at Puakea Bay Drive too, beyond the curfew of 10.00pm . The Party lights and light geysers are not sympathetic to a rural environment and will certainly affect both people and animals, especially birds like owls, nearby Traffic levels The population of Hawi is about one thousand, so an event of 100 people plus the catering staff, music and entertainment equipment , lighting crews, deliveries of chairs and tables, decorators, photographers, musicians, food and drink deliveries will have a significant impact on traffic levels, let alone an event of 300 paying guests. Clearly the people making the comments do not live in the area. Most of the paying guests will be arriving for the same start time. There is no virtually no signage on the gate -in fact the directions say the 'Ranch" is opposite Puakea Bay Ranch gatehouse so many drive around the area looking for the place. It may be a coincidence but the asphalt outside the entrance has just been repaired as there were many cracks in the road indicating increased wear and tear. Safety and fire risk The events have had firework displays, fire lantern release, sparklers which also seriously increase the risk of wildfires, especially this year. In the wedding information on the website the owners offer to light a bonfire to enable enable the events to continue after the 10.00 pm curfew. Direct quote "after the amplified musicians must end the party can go on into the night! Just ask us about setting up a bonfire for iou" not great news for any of us living close by. 2 Thank you for reading to the end of this email.Please confirm that you have received.Sincerely Margaret Brevoort 56-2878 Puakea Bay drive Hawi, HI 96755 3 lip[WIMOW PULE H16HWAY HAWI,HAWAI %7I 80x'311.6801 www.PlAKEARANCM.COM October 21, 2019 Margaret Brevoort 56-2878 Puakea Bay Drive Hawi, HI 96719 via peggbre@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Ms. Brevoort: Thank you for your comment email dated September 20, 2019, in which you stated a number of concerns including the current enforcement action,property taxes, cultural and historical resources,the disposal of sewage, water consumption,noise and light pollution,traffic levels, safety and fire risk. Thank you for recognizing the importance of these items. The environmental assessment(EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. County ofHawari enforcement action The County ofHawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Taxes We acknowledge your comment regarding taxes, specifically related to property taxes, assessments and permit fees. To our knowledge all taxes have been paid according to law and it is our intention to continue that practice. Additionally, we plan to comply with all required permit and application fees throughout this process. This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA. However, as quoted,we do state how our tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. 3. Cultural and historical resources 1 We acknowledge your comment regarding cultural and historical resources and share your concerns. We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 of the EA. In addition,the Hawai`i State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process. An example of that is demonstrated in Appendix 4. 4. Wastewater disposal We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater, specifically disposal. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 ofthe EA.Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements ofthe State Department of Health,per Hawaii Administrative Rules HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems."In addition,we anticipate coordinating any upgrades to the existing systems as part of the permitting process moving forward. Do note,that a property ofthis size is allowed through Chapter 62 to incorporate multiple individual wastewater systems. It is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive,with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface ground water. In addition,portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent, large events, and that therefore the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use. 5. Water usage We acknowledge your comment regarding water consumption. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA. In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination of these sources of water will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors. 6. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 ofthe EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. Furthermore,there are appropriate legal remedies regarding the enforcement ofnoise violations. This is covered in Hawaii Administrative Rules(HAR), Title 11, Chapter 46, "Community Noise Control."In addition,the State Department ofHealth maintains reference to describe various kinds of noise,their sources and who you should contact to resolve the problem. Additionally,we are unaware of any scientific studies that show that domestic animals that are penned in large lots adjacent to a site hosting a party of the types proposed for the operation would actually suffer any adverse impacts. 7. Light pollution We acknowledge your comment regarding light pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 of the EA. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County ofHawai`i Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai`i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding ofexterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. 8. Traffic 2 We acknowledge your comment regarding traffic. This is addressed in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. 9. Fire We acknowledge your comment regarding fire and share the general concern of human caused events. As such we enforce a strict no open flame rule with all guests. Additionally all campfires are prearranged and managed by Puakea Ranch staff. Guests are not allowed to start any fires. This is addressed in Section 3.1.2 ofthe EA. Your letter mentioned firework displays, fire lantern releases, and sparklers being used on property. There has never been a fireworks display at the property; this assertion is factually inaccurate. Once, years ago,there was a guest who, in violation ofthe rules released fire lanterns on site. The guest was immediately told to stop this activity, the lanterns were retrieved by ranch staff, and the guest was fined for violating the fire policy rules. This has not happened again since that time. To our knowledge, sparklers have never been used on site. Their use would certainly be against the rules and would not be tolerated. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 3 Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael Sent: Saturday, September 21, 2019 4:18 PM To:Mori,Ashley Cc:Darrow,Jeff t' Subject: RE: Ranch at Puakea vu Ashley, O c -- Please intake to Jeff. r•-; Jeff-respond as appropriate. 3 . Thanks, Michael Original Message From:terin johnston [mailto:terinjohnston29@gmail.com] Sent:Thursday, September 19, 2019 3:09 PM To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Ranch at Puakea Sent from my iPad Dear Mr.Yee, I am a home owner directly across from the proposed increase and or revised permit for the "Guest Ranch"which has seemingly slipped under the radar for all of us as none of us has been asked to join a forum or a town hall meeting on the subject.The signage at the gate is weathered,obscured and essentially part of the rustic look has not given us enough information as to what exactly is to transpire once the new permit,goes through. We have heard that deep pockets and a former AG from Hawaii are pushing this endeavor through and other than self promotion we have heard nothing.We sincerely hope that we as neighbors living in the agricultural lands will have a chance to present our side as well.Why has there not been such a disclosure? It cannot be true that deep pockets here have sway. But it's starting to look that way. It's understood that their application null and voids the fines they were handed which is ludicrous.They have un-permitted structures, no sewage solutions, no added value to anyone but themselves being listed as out of state and an agricultural status. How is that possible? A hotel? Guest cottages?Wedding venue?Treehouse stay? None are permitted? Historical interest?One of our residences has the Hawaiian retreat and they have paid taxes for their business and gained permits accordingly. How is that fair when they are to go by the letter of the law and the Ranch at Puakea or Guest Ranch pay nothing and are moving ahead considering they ignored cease and desist letters and unpaid fines in the hundreds of thousands..they now get to reapply and move forward? None of the community will benefit and the direct neighbors to her property are now having to look at selling. Nobody asked for this when they decided to move an hours drive from Kona to the northern tip of the island. 1 127958 We want a chance to at least hear the impact conclusion of which they found to be none. 3 day weddings with 365 guests, music venue,added rooms and portable toilets. The driveway is directly opposite our home. No one asked us...it's all been terribly stealth. Not good. Not happy. Thank you for your time, Terin Johnston 2 Begin forwarded message: From:terin johnston <terinjohnston29@gmaii.com> Date: October 9, 2019 at 4:04:37 PM HST To: michaeLyee@hawaiicounty.gov Subject: Retraction letter Sent from my iPad Dear Mr.Yee, I am writing to you to ask that my previous letter to you in regards to the Puakea Ranch be retracted.The reason being is I feel that I wrote you in haste and sadly with only one side of a story. Christie Cash had responded to my emails with an invitation to come see for myself what was in question. My neighbor and I went to visit her yesterday and were astonished at what they've accomplished and what was transpiring with the heritage listed site. I asked many questions as we were given a full tour of the cottages, garden, grounds and pavilion. Christie was forthcoming and open. I understand that she is seeking to resolve the issues with fines, building permits and similar administration formalities. I'd hate to think that this special Hawaiian historical site could be torn up or made into another mega mansion.There could be no better preservation than to have visitors enjoying an old Hawaiian homestead here on the Big Island. Hopefully there will be a positive outcome and we can all be better neighbors with support and Aloha for one another. Thank you for your time, Terin Johnston x 141011** 56•444AKONI PULE HIGHWAY NAW1, HAWAI'i 9671, 8g8'/1I•Q8O www.PW KE9.RANCH.GOM October 21, 2019 Terin Johnston via terinjohnston29@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Ms. Johnston: Thank you for your comment email dated September 19, 2019 and your subsequent withdrawal dated October 09, 2019. We appreciate your interest and acknowledge your willingness to meet directly and discuss the situation. The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application.Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission.We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will also be considered at the special permit venue. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow(c hawaiicounty.gov only] 1 Mori, Ashley From: Andrew Latham <a.lathaml@icloud.com> Sent: Sunday, September 22, 2019 9:56 PM To: Yee, Michael Cc:Planning Internet Mail Subject: Letter regarding Puakea Ranch Application Draft Environmental Assessment and AFONSI Attachments: Letter to Michael Yee 22 Sept 2019.pdf Dear Director Yee, Please find attached a letter regarding a DEA and AFONSI relating to Puakea "Guest" Ranch. I would be most grateful if this letter were to be taken into the County's deliberations on the Change of Use application for the properties. Kind Regards Andrew Latham U c V 1 127959 t1 I1CP 1.\., • 1".,..Iii' PI •1•La:. Date:September 12`'i 2019 lichacl Yee Planning,Director 101 Pauahi.Suite 3 Hilo til 96720 Dear Director Yee: 1 am writing to you in response to an publication dated August 56 2019 hut not circulated for comment until August 23rd 2019 by the County of I lawaii Planning Department regarding: Draft l n\ironmental Assessment t DEA)and Anticipated Finding of\o Significant Impact PONSI) Applicant:Christie Ca-h Project: Puakea Ciuest Ranch I MK:(3)5-6-001 :082.North kohala Di'.trict.Island of 1 grunt. I wish to make a number ofobservations regarding the planning notice and also to suggest that there may have been a couple ofomissions to the Notice that require confirmation. As)ou are well aware,subsequent to the purchase ofthe property known as Puakea Ranch 1\1K-13)5-6-Ot)1 :0R2).the current owners' have undettaken a substantial number of works without permits and ha\e also been running an unpermitted business Iron the propett) in a toned Agricultural area. I his has set a dangerous precedent for other properties in the icinity that are also zoned Agricultural and appro\at of the proposed change of use at Puakea Ranch is like!) to embolden a number of other local commercial activities that would not meet Agricultural Zoning requirements and statutes where there is nc real intent to carr out actual agricultural practices It is therefore critical that this Application is not considered in isolation hut in the context ofthe subsequent consequential impacts that this could and probably will have on the local area. With regard to the current situation at Puakea Ranch.prior to the Application.I have not been able to find any record Property taxes beim!paid that would ha\e been commensurate with the change of use including the restoration of properties and subsequent rental thereof.I have also not been able to locate records(although there may he such records available)showing that during the restoration of the"historical properties",septic tanks or septic s)stents that meet current codes were installed on the property. I he existing cess pools(if indeed present for all properties)would not meet current codes and may in likelihood Ix'releasing foul water into the en\ironment. ['here is no e\idenec to suggest that"gra\ \Nater"systems ha‘e been installed or.iiso.how the) the')eine used. In 2019.with four cottages.a"tree house".an airstream hailer and 10 swimmune pools_the ta\able salute is just S573..toit and the tax billoatsS5,657,8(,.Furthermore.the current ssater thage at the property.according to thepublishedletterfronttheDepartmenttil1t'atel Supp') dated December 1 I`s' (117+shows that current usage exceeds the permitted usage fora single famils thselImne b! a factor of 11.7 5.50Ogpd sersu•4000d). Increasing the actitit} on the site must lead to increased water usage and the Department of tt ate Stipp') clears indicated that additional supplies,sere not asailable under the current Water I'sage plans. One major concern that I base is the refercnec on the owners'website to the lighting ofbonfiresforguest:"afier the amplified musicians must end the part)". 't'tile the Application states that there is a strict') enforced"No open flame—poke) w ith guests.and that campfires'are located in a special') designed lire pit,and that a hose is on hand.and that there gill he no tires during 'dr) and winds conditions:the cite is almost always ssinds.the presailing winds will bloss burning embers towards the makai west and south of the site. where rainfall is much lower and the segetation is much drier.Embers can carr) substantial distances and the area in general has a very high lire risk.The letter from the Fire Department dated Januar) 2_1d 2019 states the requirement Air fire%chicle access and lire hydrants.which have not yet been installed. Regarding local habitat and wildlife.the Ens irunmental Assessment cleat omits an) mention ofthe nails e Pueo.which is found user this area.and also Nene.,which common!) s isit the locale.I base obsersed are at least two pairs ofPuce in the area'seloss the Alone Pule 1 lighwa).and therefore prohabls others in the area. The)are listed as an Endangered Species in O'ahtt.and their numbers are in decline in the Islands..\ccnrding to ttlkipedia. Poco appear to he somewhat resistant to the as ian malaria that has devastated mans other endemic bird populations in Hawaii:12114j how eser.the) base recent') become s ictim to a m)sterious"sick owl syndrome".or SOS.in which large numbers of pueo base been found walking dazed') on roads,leading to death byctsllision.The cause of sick owl sy ndrome i. unknown:it is suspected that pesticide toxicit) ma) be responsible.particular') through secondary rodenticide poisoning.However.it has also been lbpothesized that the cause ma) be an infectious agent.sciiure-like confusion due to light_pollution.or a sari,* olother causes."'The planned fireworks and light shows at the Puakea Ranch facility us ill'gleed) base an adverse effect an these natisc specie.. While the owners'state that the) plan to end""amplified music"at IOPNI in accoidance w ith local noise abatement regulations.this has not been the case on prior occasions and the music.which can he heard well oser a mile asvalt•at nn property.is extreme') loud. I he l:A notes on page 37 that"The manager's home at luakea Ranch was considered to be a grand estate at this time and elan) parties and gatherings were hosted there,as"the Social"ssas a very impottan part ofthe predominantly British culture of North Kohala s sugar and mill owners." 1 hey fail to note that at that time.electric light shows and amplified musicvv ere not a part of the ksti%hies and so sound and light pollution would not have been the issue that it is today. I he ow nets'state that"community e%ems-are an important part of their plans yet.in the time that they have been owners'ofthe property.I have not seen any indication that they hay e held or extended my nations to hold.community ev ruts Whilst my view is speculative.I belie%e that this bjust a token offering vtith no plans to implement I do note from Google images that the way that the grasses are being mowed could be interpreted to suggest the initial design and'it layout of a•-pitch and putt'-or small golfing range wick 8 ot 9 potential fairway s and ercens. In a letter from the owner to Dr..t1an Downer dated November 26th 2018.it states that"fhe 100,year-old vegetation that surrounds the entire 33 acre property is an unparalleled location for enjoying the outdoor beauty ofNorth Kohala in a park like setting.lowering Nlango and Monkey Pod trees planted over IOU years ago oiler welcoming shaded areas with sweeping ocean v iews.I argue tegetable gardens.fruit trees ofall varieties.pineapple groves.lavender groves and farm fresh eggs are all part of the rich agricultural and historic experience we offer to our guests."It is interesting to note that not only are the"pineapple-and"lavender groves not visible on Google earth images.they are specifically not mertioned in the Ens ironmental Assessment document listing of nota nor in the I lawn and Associates Cultural Impact Assessment.vthich woukf lead me to conclude that either they do not exist or that they exist in only vcry small plantings rather then in"groves'.l his suggests a degi ec of latitude in the application that may indicate other aspects of the application that.upon full investigation.might raise suspicion. Regarding the suggested benefits to the local community,I suggest that these will be minimal ot non-existent.l yen iflocal residents are employed.the numbers will be few.It has been our experience since moving to the island that our more wealthy neighbors tend to use companies under contract to undertake maintenance and services and that their employees are otien not local residents.but come front Waikaloa.Kona or even the windward side ofthe island.The local coffee shop and restaurants may have some small benefit of the additional people.but the likelihood ot'Ihis expandingjobs in the area are remote. 1 he 1 lDo l letter dated Januar) 7th 2019 requited the applicant to engage a"licensed professional engineer'to prepare the I taftic impact Assessment.Page 4:1 of the 1:A does not specifically refer to the Licensed engineer who conducted the surey.and I see no other publication by said expert in the documentation.What the EA states is: to alcue'I ofJanuary -. '(11trlsee.11,14.1dixIto the Ill)(II ,eyuevedprep(trationofaironic s+essnrert!/*1•a lr(ensr(1 pr•ofe's ttnr701 ertgr'lew•Ice include trip generation. an evtlhtutu,n of the Itrujt'(7 actress and re,ciinrne l(I1117//•ot'e'nit'/!(c(It IrmfJic.I s s(a,/,writs cert'alt n conductedreef for pi ofec/s to deli',mite'it the/n'opose'd(1(11011lrdcrt prochrce significant trut;it nupac'ts Section 25-2- 1( nelu•rent t•h'equirements) (.07071) oftat+at'i Comm!,!('ode for example. requires a traffic impact anclll sis report 171.110frith the WI, for 1111'_011117r(rnle'ndnre'!11 ti hit h(1117 generate 51(n•more pea hour trips 10 corium'e the.scale of ilrlpactt of rhe•minimum sized Srrb(Jit7sion that ir•iggi'?s the need for a T/IR under the Countynt}' in?engineer cissc's+ed the traffic(,'n('rcuion c•hcn'acler'is(ic+o/the l'ro/lo+e'(lAction. The nip,generation urtvhodologi used is based upon applications.developed by the htstitute• of transportation/a:gineers 1111 i and puhlished in "lip (veneration.11aimar. 9th Edition. 2(1/2. drip gene'raninlls hate been del eloped for twrieh'of land 11.cc(or fueilin'Itpe's)that correlate trips with duelling tents. area.population. 'chicle o11nershlp and intensity of the Each b ,Heti' ltpc'7115 cl catalog(las ti/k than number for identificationpurposes for any given classification. repeated liehl studiets ht'the 11 E nu'ttsuring actual trips generated hi different land IfWA has culclrkrted a venerator factor for peer/,hour trips This-fat for 1.s multiplied ht the rinrnlsel of units in a land The This is further derided into trips that are entering or exiting the development. a split that differs/IF time ofdal' In this case. the published dhua+et(toes not bine good data twee 11w qpe o/use anticipated in order to approximate a C'assi_/ic•a(lon n 11(1.1 nc'cessurr to eJ/irrlcne daily trip,hated upon the e_tpceied staffing/meets and the maximum attendance Mowed ht•eupnc From this statement,with no additional reference regarding the expert used to generate the numbers provided.I must conclude that the preparer ofthe document undertook their own study based upon"the trip generation methodology ...developed by the Institute of Transportation Engineers'.From our ossn experience of the traffic movements in Puakea Bay Ranch.of which we hale quite a long standing record,especially for contract staff and workers entering and leaving the site,we would say that the estimates are considerably underestimated and should be further reviewed. The owner refers to the current use of the property as a ranch with horses etc.I believe at the last count there was one aging horse,a couple ofgoats and a few chickens.Hardly a working ranch,i suggest. In addition,in reference to the owner's letter of November 26'h 2018 which states that Without properties like Puakea Ranch and our efforts to save the rest of the structures from the ravishes of time.salt.wind and rain.Puakea Ranch would he nothing more than another Gentlemen's Ranch-with one NEW Grand Home.closed to the rest of the word(sic)and this community." I would like to point out that other communities in the area,such as our own,do hold local community cents front time to time and especially to celebrate the historical cultural and religious aspects ofthe land upon which we lite. Kahunas come to pray w ith us and for us.and hula groups come to dance V,lilt us in remembrance ofthe historical context(tithe land and sea. Finally,it would seem to be a considerable affront to the State of I lawaii and its' people to have an owner who has been a little less than honest in paying their property taxes(according to the property tax records)and who has not yet,I understand,paid the tines levied upon them by the State in January 2019 for their illegal activities,apply for a waiver of Land Use Status and a change in use of the property. Who is to say that they will not continue to underrepresent the property usage so as to reduce their tax hills? Sincerely Andrew I.atham 7E 61 AKONI PULE hIGHWAY HAWI, HAW I ,6719 808.317.0805 WWW.PUAKEARANCH.COM October 21, 2019 Andrew Latham via a.lathaml@icloud.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Dear Mr. Latham: Thank you for your comment email dated September 22, 2019, in which you stated a number of concerns including the current enforcement action, property taxes, the disposal of sewage, water consumption, fire risk, the Pueo and light pollution, noise pollution, community events, satellite images, community benefits, traffic study and other comparisons. Thank you for recognizing the importance of these items. The environmental assessment(EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. County ofHawai'i enforcement action The County ofHawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction ofthe Hawaii Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Taxes We acknowledge your comment regarding taxws, specifically related to property taxes. To our knowledge all taxes have been paid according to law and it is our intention to continue that practice. This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA. 3. Wastewater disposal 1 We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater disposal. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA.Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health, per Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR),Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems." In addition, we anticipate coordinating any upgrades to the existing systems as part of the permitting process moving forward. Do note, that a property of this size is allowed through Chapter 62 to incorporate multiple individual wastewater systems. It is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive, with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface ground water. In addition, portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent, large events, and that therefore the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use. 5. Water usage We acknowledge your comment regarding water consumption. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA. In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination of these sources of water will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors. 6. Fire We acknowledge your comment regarding fire and share the general concern of human caused events. As such we enforce a strict no open flame rule with all guests.Additionally all campfires are prearranged and managed by Puakea Ranch staff. Guests are not allowed to start any fires. This is addressed in Section 3.1.2 of the EA. 7. Light pollution We acknowledge your comment regarding light pollution. This is addressed in Section 3.1.4 of the EA. All permanent lighting would be shielded in conformance with County of Hawai`i Outdoor Lighting Ordinance (Hawai'i County Code Chapter 9,Article 14),which requires shielding of exterior lights to lower the ambient glare caused by unshielded lighting. In addition, we thank you for noting the presence of the Hawaiian short eared owl (Asio flammeus sandwichensis). We are aware of the presence of this species and it will not be affected by any current or proposed activities.Although the species is not protected on Hawaii Island under the Endangered Species Act, we value and appreciate the Pueo. This information has been added to the Final EA. 8. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA.We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. 9. Community events and benefits We acknowledge your comment regarding community events and benefits. This is addressed throughout the EA, namely on Pages 4, 5 and 6, and in Section 3.2.1 of the EA. 10. Satellite images 2 We acknowledge your comments regarding your review of satellite images. Our farming operation does in fact include lavender and pineapple. There are no plans for a "pitch and putt."We welcome a visit to the ranch to alleviate your suspicions. 11. Traffic We acknowledge your comment regarding the traffic assessment report. This is available in Appendix 5 of the EA. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow(@hawaiicounty.gov only] 3 Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 4:40 PM To:Mori,Ashley Subject: FW: DEA for Puakea Guest Ranch QJ. Please intake to Jeff C,' 11) O-rr, Original Message w From: Robert Watkins<doc.watkins@icloud.com> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 4:29 PM To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: christie@puakearanch.com; corinne latham<cjlatham@sbcglobal.net> cb Subject: DEA for Puakea Guest Ranch c-A) z --I TMK (3) 5-6-001:082 North Kohala District Island of Hawai'i September 23,2019 Dear Planning Director Yee; I note that the trigger for this DEA is any use within any historic site designated in the Historic Register.Although Ms.Cash submitted and was granted this designation in August 2009,the applicant did not truthfully disclose their unpermitted construction aimed toward commercial activity,and have not complied with SHPD's requirements.This property has been and continues to operate totally illegally as a commercial use within an agricultural district,without a Special Use Permit, in outright defiance of County of Hawaii cease and desist legal action filed in March 2009.This applicant makes a mockery of standard requirements which the rest of the population must follow in regards to zoning and building codes, continues to advertise online,and now has the impertinence to submit a DEA which answers every one of the criteria as of no significance .Do the applicant believe that now obtaining aDEA as required by HRS 343.5(4), which they were informed of in December 2009 and chose not to comply with, will somehow absolve them of years of defiance and illegal activities? It is a matter of public record that the applicant have created a noise problem for their neighbors,that they don't have permits for cesspools and continue to discharge sewage and grey water illegally,pay only agricultural taxes on those"Guest Ranch "operation,and do not have Water Department approval for the high use thru a single small meter that additionally services a dozen real agricultural indeavors. For these reasons, I urge you to deny or dismiss this DEA request.Any other action is not dictated by the facts Sincerely RobertWatkins Sent from my iPad 1 127960 61 b-2g6j AKONI PULE HIGHWAY HAWI,HAWAII 9671, 808.3i9.08D, WWW.PUAKEARANCH.COM October 21, 2019 Robert Watkins, MD via doc.watkins@icloud.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Dr. Watkins: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019, in which you stated a number of concerns including the current enforcement action,historical requirements, a noise problem, sewage discharge, agricultural taxes and water usage. Thank you for recognizing the importance ofthese items. The environmental assessment(EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. County ofHawaii enforcement action The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction ofthe Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Historical requirements We acknowledge your comment regarding our historic site designation. We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 ofthe EA. In addition, the Hawai`i State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process. An example of that is demonstrated in Appendix 4. 3. Noise 1. We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 ofthe EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. 4. Wastewater disposal We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater, specifically disposal. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health,per Hawaii Administrative Rules HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems."In addition, we anticipate coordinating any upgrades to the existing systems as part of the permitting process moving forward. Do note,that a property ofthis size is allowed through Chapter 62 to incorporate multiple individual wastewater systems. It is large enough that these systems be unobtrusive, with no adverse effects on the property or the subsurface ground water. In addition, portable toilets have been used and will continue to be used for infrequent, large events, and that therefore the septic systems will not be burdened by large event use. 5. Taxes We acknowledge your comment regarding taxes. To our knowledge all taxes have been paid according to law and it is our intention to continue that practice. This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA. However, we do state how our tax contributions would more than compensate for extra costs of public services in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. 6. Water usage We acknowledge your comment regarding water consumption. This is addressed in Section 3.1.3 and Section 3.3.1 of the EA. In addition to water catchment we propose to incorporate a private well and reconnect to the Kohala Ditch. The combination of these sources of water will be adequate for this use and they will not impact neighbors. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 2 Mori, Ashley From:Yee, Michael Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 3:21 PM To: Mori,Ashley Cc:Ley, Rachelle v Subject: FW: Draft Environment Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3) 5'-6-O41°O82 North Kohala Applicant:Christie Cash Please intake to Jeff. c r From: Leslie Weber<leslieweberll@gmail.com> Sent: Monday,September 23,2019 3:19 PM To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Planning Internet Mail<planning@co.hawaii.hi.us> Subject: Draft Environment Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3) 5-6-001:082 North Kohala Applicant: Christie Cash Dear Mr. Lee As a resident of Puakea Bay Ranch,across from the proposed development noted above,i have a number of objections and concerns. 1.The DEA should be denied or dismissed until the County of Hawaii V Christine Cash et al Litigation is resolved.The applicant has historically completed work on her property without the appropriate permits.All of the outstanding issues should be resolved prior to allowing her to proceed with her application. 2.As we are downstream from cesspools on the applicant's property that drain into our environment I am very concerned about the potential of even greater amounts of this material entering our ranch.I respectfully ask that the county take a very close look at what the applicant is currently doing to ensure full compliance with all regulations and that consideration be given to how her proposed significant increases in guests will affect the systems currently in place and the health and safety of our community. 3.The master water meter for the Puakea Ranch subdivision of 9 lots is designed for 400 gallons per day for each lot,it is highly likely that the consumption of water at this one site far exceeds the allocation for the entire subdivision. More buildings and people could lead to future water shortages for all the other residents. 4. Puakea Bay Ranch is already adversely affected by the noise coming from the applicant's property beyond 10 PM.The applicant appears to have no respect for the peace and quiet of our community. Previous noise complaints have not resulted in any changes.Allowing her to significantly add to her guest count is only going to make matters worse, especially given that she is proposing to host large wedding groups that most certainly will be partying well past 10 PM. 5.The applicants driveway is directly opposite our ranch's gatehouse.With hundreds of vehicles converging on this small space in a 55 MPH zone there are bound to be unsafe situations and the potential for accidents is high.Signage of the applicant's property is poor.Guests looking for her property often mistake our gatehouse for her location and then are forced to turn around in a tight area and re-enter the highway once again.Chaos will ensue. 6.We are in a high risk fire zone,as advised by the local fire marshall.The applicant uses fireworks,sparklers and bonfires to entertain her guests.With our high winds and dry conditions,this could be disastrous for our community and for the wildlife in the area. 1 127961. 7.The financial benefit of one person should not out-weigh the impact on the health and safety of environment of the many who share it, both people and wildlife. Sincerely, Leslie Weber Puakea Bay Ranch 2 Mori, Ashley From: Leslie Weber <leslieweberl l@gmail.com> Sent: Wednesday, September 25, 2019 4:25 PM To: Yee, Michael; Planning Internet Mail Subject: Fwd: Draft Environment Assessment(DEA)for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK (3) 5-6-001:082; North Kohala Applicant:Christie Cash Please note that I am WITHDRAWING my email that I sent to you yesterday. The email is below. I no longer wish to participate in this dispute effective immediately. ti - • -Thanks, Leslie Weber fT1 V J7 Begin forwarded message: • From: Leslie Weber<Ieslieweber11( gmail.com> Subject: Draft Environment Assessment (DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK1a) car•{ 5-6-001:082 North Kohala Applicant: Christie Cash Date: September 23, 2019 at 6:18:52 PM PDT To: michael.yee(c hawaiicountv.gov Cc: planning hawaiicounty.gov Dear Mr.Lee As a resident of Puakea Bay Ranch,across from the proposed development noted above,i have a number of objections and concerns. 1.The DEA should be denied or dismissed until the County ofHawaii V Christine Cash et al Litigation is resolved.The applicant has historically completed work on her property without the appropriate permits.All of the outstanding issues should be resolved prior to allowing her to proceed with her application. 2. As we are downstream from cesspools on the applicant's property that drain into our environment I am very concerned about the potential of even greater amounts of this material entering our ranch.I respectfully ask that the county take a very close look at what the applicant is currently doing to ensure full compliance with all regulations and that consideration be given to how her proposed significant increases in guests will affect the systems currently in place and the health and safety of our community. 3. The master water meter for the Puakea Ranch subdivision of 9 lots is designed for 400 gallons per day for each lot,it is highly likely that the consumption of water at this one site far exceeds the allocation for the entire subdivision. More buildings and people could lead to future water shortages for all the other residents. 4.Puakea Bay Ranch is already adversely affected by the noise coming from the applicant's property beyond 10 PM.The applicant appears to have no respect for the peace and quiet of our community.Previous noise complaints have not resulted in any changes.Allowing her to significantly add to her guest count is only going to make matters worse,especially given that she is proposing to host large wedding groups that most certainly will be partying well past 10 PM. 1 127965 5.The applicants driveway is directly opposite our ranch's gatehouse.With hundreds of vehicles converging on this small space in a 55 MPH zone there are bound to be unsafe situations and the potential for accidents is high. Signage ofthe applicant's property is poor.Guests looking for her property often mistake our gatehouse for her location and then are forced to turn around in a tight area and re-enter the highway once again.Chaos will ensue. 6.We are in a high risk fire zone,as advised by the local fire marshall.The applicant uses fireworks,sparklers and bonfires to entertain her guests.With our high winds and dry conditions,this could be disastrous for our community and for the wildlife in the area. 7.The financial benefit ofone person should not out-weigh the impact on the health and safety of environment of the many who share it,both people and wildlife. Sincerely, Leslie Weber Puakea Bay Ranch 2 t < 6 z861AKONI PULE I1iC,HWAY HAWI, HAWAI'1 96719 808.319'0805 www.PUM EARANCH.COM October 21, 2019 Leslie Weber via Ieslieweberll@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Ms. Weber: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019 and your subsequent withdrawal dated September 25, 2019. We appreciate your interest and acknowledge your willingness to meet directly and discuss the situation. The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission.We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will also be considered at the special permit venue. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at(808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 1 Mori, Ashley n From: Ley, Rachelle to Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 1:03 PM t14 *.g G To: hulamoosefarm7@gmail.com n,A c-, Cc:Gillis, Elizabeth; Mori, Ashley Subject: FW: Corrections to Puakea Ranch draft of EPA No impact??? Michael Yee xt: Aloha Christine, Thank you for your comments. They have been forwarded to Director Yee and appropriate staff for review. Mahalo! Wsicheite Ley Private Secretary to the Planning Director j) County of Hawaii Planning Department v 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 v Hilo,Hawai'i 96720 Phone: (808)961-8125 C) Fax: (808)961-8742 Email: rachelle.lev@hawaiicountv.gov CO Website: www.hiplanningdept.com r Hawaii County is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. From: Christine Sprowl Tetak [mailto:hulamoosefarm7@gmail.com] Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 12:19 PM To:Yanagi, Horace<Horace.Yanagi@hawaiicounty.gov> Cc: Gillis, Elizabeth<Elizabeth.Gillis@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Fwd: Corrections to Puakea Ranch draft of EPA No impact??? Michael Yee Aloha Horace and Libby, Planning Director Michael Yee, Can you forward this correspondence to Michael Yee for me. I just found out the response was due today and I want Michael Yee to know that Lot#l's SP and Guest Ranch will impact our Lot#3 and create a hardship for us. Most all of the Puakea Ranch owners oppose Cash's attempts to gain the SP. We ask that you reject the DEA until the complaint filed agains the Beverly Hills owners is resolved. Consideration of the DEA is premature as it requests the expansion of the existing un permitted Guest Ranch activities alleged in the complaint. A ruling for t he dismissal/denial of the DEA by the Planning Director is appropriate until the Court rules on these allegations and the fines owing of approx $350,000 are paid inn full. The proposed use will have a huge impact on the environment and therefore we support the alternative of No Action by the Planning Department. Mahalo, 1 127962 Christine Sprowl Tetak, Owner of Lot#3 400 feet from Lot#1 Please read below: Begin forwarded message: From: Christine Sprowl Tetak <hulamoosefarm7(c gmaii.com> Subject: Fwd: Corrections to Puakea Ranch draft of EPA No impact??? Michael Yee Date: September 23, 2019 at 11:58:37 AM HST To: hiplanningdept.com Aloha Michael, I just realized that my response to Cash's EA No impact had a due date. Due to my own illness it has taken me time to get this response to you. Below is my response to the inaccurate reporting of Elizabeth Pitts in the WHT article titled Puakea Ranch (Lot#1) EA finds no impact. Please read below and add to the file of responses regarding the never ending quest by Cash for the Special Permit for the Guest Ranch that she continues to operate with out permits and without paying the NOV fines. We have the neighboring ranch land on Lot#3 just 400 feet from the noisy illegal pavilion built with out permits in 2016. The violations continue and if she is granted the SP the will perpetuated into the future for you department to manage. Just say NO! Our beautiful and historical ranch has lost value with the illegal business operation on Ag zoned land. It is a crime what is planned for the historic ranch she owns and rents out to anyone who will pay. Please do not let this happen. Even with the draft EA her operation still does not work on our AG land. We have 7 of the Waikoloa Nightingale donkeys grazing on our land and we planted white pineapple a few years ago that are producing. It is so sad to see our dream of a little ranch house cottage on our land turn into a nightmare. Our land is on the market but who will buy it knowing who the neighbor is977999 I do know that the surrounding Blots do not want Cash to expand and the owners across the hwy at Puakea Bay Ranch do not want her expansion as it will change the fabric and landscape of our quiet agricultural life forever, Warmest Aloha, Christine Sprowl Tetak Owner of Lot#3 Puakea Ranch 2 Hawi, HI Begin forwarded message: From: Christine Sprowl Tetak <hulamoosefarm7( gmail.com> Subject: Corrections to Puakea Ranch draft of EPA No impact??? Date: September 23, 2019 at 11:39:36 AM HST To: Epitts@westhawaiitoday.com Aloha Elizabeth Pitts, Response to Cash's "No Impact. press release. I am a direct neighbor that uses our deeded easement driving through Lot#1 Ms. Cash's wedding/event business. We have been impacted by excess noise and traffic from events and gatherings, blocked easement to where we could not drive out to the highway and all this on Ag zoned land. We purchased our 25.2 acres in August of 2012. Cash has created a money making illegal business out of her beautiful historic ranch. Our ranch is only 400feet from the upper border of her lot where she hosts the loud parties in the non permitted pavilion that was built back in 2016. Cash has been attempting to get that Special Permit from the county planning department since 2011 and was always denied as her attempts were never complete. She is not one to let go and is obsessed with this plan to turn this beautiful vintage ranch into her fantasy to make her millions. She lives in Santa Monica and is an absent owner when trouble arises. The animals have run amuck along our easement and damaged one neighbor's truck. Very dangerous to drive up the easement not knowing what livestock or horse will be blocking the road. When and actual neighbor has experience the impact Puakea Ranch lot 1 has caused there is no amount of studies that can be done when EA's and lots of money their way sway the result. They never asked us. One time I was driving with my sister visiting from California and just trying to leave the ranch. We had to open the lower gate to get out to the highway. I was driving and my sister had to wrangle 2 horses away from our side of the gate with at least 3 other horses on the other side trying to enter. It is a miracle we did not get trampled. Just one example. In 2016 a very large wedding 400+- people was held in June. There were no parking attendants and guests just parked where ever they could at the lower entry part by the giant Kaiwe tree. When they ran out of places to park they blocked our easement gate! Huge impact if there was an 3 emergency as the vehicles would never be able to drive through the mass of cars parked all over. The animals rarely have safety fencing and love to escape to run to freedom. I have written dozens of certified letters to complain to our Mayor, the planning dept, etc. The fines still accrue and they are up to and passing $350,000 and will continue until Lot 1 Cash corrects all the Notice of Violations. Amazing how the facts change when Cash is interviewed. How on earth can the County of Hawaii issue a Special Permit for a Guest Ranch when such violations have never been corrected and fines not paid. We are seniors and we were planning on building our dream ranch cottage at our 25.2 acre ranch. Now we cannot as the party noise carries across the ag landscape and sounds like it is 10 feet away. Three years ago we adopted a small herd of the very last Waikoloa Nightingale Donkeys and we have seven grazing at the ranch. We have listed our property for sale 4 K y Voir. fi s 4 but who will buy our beautiful ranch with the huge business expansion of Cash's selfish business dreams? It makes me sick inside thinking that big money talks on this island when you can buy your way to get your way. The EA will say anything she wants them to for a buck. One opinion is not enough! We should have rights as weil. Thanks for listening Elizabeth. Christine Sprowl Tetak, Trust Owner of Lot#3 Puakea Ranch MLS# 627186 5 rry: 6.z861AKONI PULE HIGHWAY NAWI, HAWAI'! 96X9 808'M"0802 wwW.PLUAKEARANCH.COM October 14, 2019 Christine Sprowl Tetak via hulamoosefarm7@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Dear Ms. Sprowl Tetak: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019, in which you stated a number of concerns including the current enforcement action, use of agricultural land, and noise and traffic concerns with the access easement. Because you represent a parcel within the Puakea Ranch Subdivision, please know we are aware that there are disputes concerning easements, the share of water each lot gets and the use of water, and other matters related to the subdivision and to CCRs. While we are not necessarily in agreement concerning the facts of these matters and whether there are any actual issues, we acknowledge that there are differences of opinion. However, these are not environmental impacts that affect the natural environment, the community, or other resources. They are in fact a legal matter. Thank you for recognizing the importance of the items you shared. The environmental assessment EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. Existing Non-Conforming Uses The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Permitted uses 1. We acknowledge your comment regarding the proposed activity on agriculturally zoned land. According to the County of Hawaii Zoning Code (Chapter 25), a Guest Ranch is a permitted use on Agriculturally zoned land with a Special Permit.As mentioned above, without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. 3. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise including the character of the noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA. We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. Additionally, we are unaware of any scientific studies that show that domestic animals that are penned in large lots adjacent to a site hosting a party of the types proposed for the operation would actually suffer any adverse impacts. 4. Traffic We acknowledge your comment regarding traffic. This is addressed in Section 3.3.2 of the EA. Thank you for sharing the concern regarding onsite access.Any legal access rights will not be hindered. This information has been added to the Final EA(FEA). We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 2 Mori, Ashley as From: Michael Sterling <alohasterlings@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, September 23, 2019 12:07 PM k : :.; To: Planning Internet Mail sT- Subject: Puakea Ranch TMK{3} 5-6-001:082 North These people just had a large gathering/party on Sat. 9/21. Isn't this illegal, and is it OK for them to be running a3i,' ' business{VRBO style}on Ag land with several unpermitted buildings, swimming pools,Airstream trailer, etc.1Nhatalout water usage, sewage, etc.??Also the taxes they pay do not seem right,the owner, Christine Cash claims she•hasbeeri operating the business for 12 years. I am not sure how they keep getting away with this.They have been fined;fiatrk cease and desist order, but no one has done anything to stop this. I have tried calling you several times last week and today, seems impossible to talk with anyone. Would really appreciate a call when you have time. 808-731-6751 Thanks for your help, Michael & Bridgette Sterling 56-2908 Puakea Bay Dr. Hawi, HI 96719 Sent from Mail for Windows 10 fv v a <x) 9 1 127963 t Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael Sent: Thursday, October 10, 2019 8:37 PM To:Mori, Ashley Cc:Darrow,Jeff Subject: Fwd: Puakea Ranch Complaint J P• 'Z Please intake to Jeff. Jeff-hmm...the eventual Commission meeting is going to be interesting... Sent from my iPhone Begin forwarded message: s From: Bridgette Sterling<alohasterlings@gmail.com> Date: October 10, 2019 at 4:59:42 PM HST To: "Yee, Michael" <Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Puakea Ranch Complaint z c.a Dear Mr. Yee, We are writing to respectfully ask that you disregard our previous complaint filed against Puakea Ranch on September 20. We have had the pleasure of meeting with Ms. Cash at her facility and now have a better understanding of her vision moving forward. We feel there will be no impact on us what so ever. Ms. Cash's hard work and perseverance shines through in each of the beautiful units the County has placed on the Historical Registry. Sorry to have taken your time on this. We were sadly misinformed. Aloha, Bridgette &Michael Sterling SCANNED 0L-1 + d 23 1 riy;124:_379 Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael Sent: Monday, October 14, 2019 8:35 AM To: Mori, Ashley Subject: FW: Puakea Ranch Complaint j Please intake to Jeff. r From: Bridgette Sterling<alohasterlings@gmail.com> Sent:Thursday, October 10, 2019 4:58 PM To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Puakea Ranch Complaint a y Z N Dear Mr.Yee, t We are writing to respectfully ask that you disregard our previous complaint filed against Puakea Ranch on September 20. We have had the pleasure of meeting with Ms. Cash at her facility and now have a better understanding of her vision moving forward. We feel there will be no impact on us what so ever. Ms. Cash's hard work and perseverance shines through in each of the beautiful units the County has placed on the Historical Registry. Sorry to have taken your time on this. We were sadly misinformed. Aloha, Bridgette & Michael Sterling SCAor 7 1 23'3 cn: 56.zgM MUNI PULE 1116HWAY HAWI, HAWAt'i 96719 808.311'0805 www.PUAKEARANCIi.COM October 21, 2019 Michael and Bridgette Sterling 56-2908 Puakea Bay Drive Hawi, HI 96719 via alohasterlings@gmail.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Mr. and Mrs. Sterling: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019, and your subsequent withdrawal dated October 10,2019.We appreciate your interest and acknowledge your willingness to meet directly and discuss the situation. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 1 Mori, Ashley From: Yee, Michael Sent: Tuesday, September 24,2019 9:01 AM To: Mori,Ashley r=' Subject: FW: Puakea Guest Ranch DEA comments 0=n Attachments: Puakea Guest Ranch DEA-TW comments.pdf 4 -v Please intake to Jeff From:toni withington<sundownertoni@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday,September 23, 2019 8:29 AM z To:Yee, Michael<Michael.Yee@hawaiicounty.gov> Subject: Puakea Guest Ranch DEA comments Aloha Michael, Here are my comments about the Puakea Guest Ranch DEA. I have also sent a snail mail version. Looking forward to the Speakout on Wednesday. Aloha, toni Sent from Mail for Windows 10 1 127964 Toni Withington P.O. Box 76 Hawi, HI 96719 September 23, 2019 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Subject: Comments on'Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch -- TMK (3) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala Dear Director Yee, In light of the pending litigation County of Hawaii v. Christine Cash et al. I ask that you deny acceptance of the Draft Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch or defer a decision until resolution of the case as well as compliance of the property with all County of Hawaii' zoning and building codes, as well as determinations from the State Historic Preservation Division (HSPD) that archaeological surveys and preservation plans for the Registered Historic Site are complete. It would be highly inappropriate and an affront to those in the North Kohala community who obey the laws of the State and County to issue a PONS' for an illegal activity the County has allowed to go on for twelve years. This conclusion is especially enhanced by the request in the DEA for expansion of the illegal activity when the applicant has shown no visible movement to cease and desist the violations spelled out in three Notices of Violation sent by your department. Nor has she taken steps to procure the needed Special Use Permit required for the existing activities that have gone on for more than a decade. I have been a resident of Kohala for 49 years and have been active in community affairs for much of that time. I was president of the Kohala Community Association in the 1990s and chair of its Planning Committee for several years. I was on several focus groups that helped write the North Kohala Community Development Plan (NKCDP) from 2006 to 2008. Since then I have been active in the Growth Management, Community Access, Parks-Water-Roads and Power- Viewplanes-Erosion Control groups as well as assisting the Action Committee. Therefore I will address my comments on this DEA and the proposed expanded Puakea Guest Ranch with regards to the NKCDP. 1 First off, the on-going activity on TMK 5-6-001:082 must be described for what it is: A commercial hotel and event: venue run on land zoned Agriculture 20 acres by an owner living in another state, California. The operation has ignored regulations regarding zoning, building permits, property tax, wastewater disposal, historic sites review and noise abatement. It is not a ranch or other agriculture enterprise. It does not qualify for continued operation under County of Hawaii Ordinance 2018-114 (Bill 108), Rule 23 for Short-term Vacation Rentals. Growth Management concerns reflected in the NKCDP: 1. Writers of the NKCDP included a caution (page 20, see below) about the issuance of Special Use Permits (SUP) for overnight accommodation on agricultural land, since 513 units'of visitor accommodation had been issued by the Planning Department through Special Permits in the early 2000s without appropriate infrastructure allowances. In May 2010 the owner of Puakea Ranch sought and received support of the NKCDP Action Committee in favor of a pending application for a SUP to operate a guest ranch based on representations that the restoration of buildings begun in 2008 were proper, that further restorations would occur, and that the project would be subject of historic review by SHPD. A SUP application was submitted to Planning Department the following year, but not completed. The hotel and event venue has continued to operate without a SUP. 2. At monthly meetings of the Growth Management Group of the NKCDP, concern has been expressed many times over several years that an archaeological survey and preservation plan has not been prepared for the property despite extensive restoration and additional construction. Concern was expressed by neighbors of noise involved with large events on the property. Concern was expressed about increased wastewater and protection of ground water. Christie Cash attended a meeting in 2018 to address these concerns and assured the group she intended to do a Chapter 343 Environmental Assessment and apply for a Special Use Permit"soon."The group asked to be notified and told Ms. Cash of its intention to comment on both. 3. Over the years the community of North Kohala has had to deal with several incidents of developers building their large dream homes and vacation rentals while ignoring the zoning and building rules and regulations, only to come back after being officially cited to apply for"after-the-fact" permits. This is, once again, the case here. The message this sends encourages others who wish to build or restore buildings without permits to go ahead. At the same time, it damages the public's trust in its government. It discourages law abiding residents from reporting perceived violations, since there seems to be no penalty for illegal activity. It results in a loss of tax and permit revenue to the County of Hawaii. 4. This is the wording of the NKCDP in regards to Special Permit on Page 20: "One of the issues that has raised the most concern with Kohala residents is that of Special Permits, especially those that allow overnight accommodations, such as retreats." While it is true that 10 of the 17 Special Permits issued in the 2000s 2 do allow overnight accommodations, 8 of those 10 are parcels owned by one owner(the New Moon Foundation). Therefore, the bigger problem may be those land owners who are allowing overnight visitors without the appropriate permits. Stilt, community sentiment is generally that Special Permits that allow large- scale overnight accommodations should not be approved, due to the negative impacts that such developments have on the area's limited infrastructure and small-town feel." Finally, the activity proposed by the DEA must be consistent with the overall goal of the NKCDP, which states on page 26: Thus, the over-arching Goal for achieving the desired Growth Management in Kohala is summarized as: GOAL: DIRECT NORTH KOHALA'S GROWTH TO AREAS WITHIN AND NEAR EXISTING TOWN CENTERS IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE DISE RICT'S OPEN SPACE AND CULTURAL RESOURCES; AND TO PROMOTE AGRICULTURE." In my view, the Kohala Guest Ranch, as described in the DEA, does not meet that standard. I encourage the County to proceed with the litigation and setting of fines and come to resolution about the non-existing permits before addressing the environmental consequences of the.activt 'es propo d. bA,tav i Toni Withingto 3 76.18& Maui PULE h HWAY HAWI, HAwaii 9671 P8'315'Q8o5 www.PUAKEARANCH.COM October 14, 2019 Toni Withington POBOX 76 Hawi, HI 96719 via sundownertoniayahoo.com only] Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch, TMK (3)5-6-001:082, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii Dear Ms.Withington: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019, in which you stated a concern about the current enforcement action as well as a number of growth management concerns reflected in the NKCDP including a caution about the issuance of Special Permits, archaeological survey and preservation plan, after-the-fact permits, impact on limited infrastructure and small-town feel, and the overall goal of the NKCDP. Thank you for recognizing the importance of these items. The environmental assessment (EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each: 1. Current enforcement action The County of Hawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application.Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Permitted uses We acknowledge your comment regarding the proposed activity on agriculturally zoned land. According to the County of Hawaii Zoning Code (Chapter 25), a Guest Ranch is a permitted use on Agriculturally zoned land with a Special Permit.As mentioned above, without satisfaction of the 1 Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. 3. Cultural and historical resources We acknowledge your comment regarding cultural and historical resources and share your concerns. We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 of the EA. In addition, the Hawaii State Historic Preservation Division (SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process.An example of that is demonstrated in Appendix 4. 4. Noise We acknowledge your comment regarding noise. This is addressed in Section 3.1.5 of the EA.We have responded to this concern as part of the design of the Proposed Action and are committed to working cooperatively with the neighbors to address future issues. 5. Wastewater disposal We acknowledge your comment regarding wastewater,. This is addressed in Section 3.3.1 of the EA. Any wastewater system proposed will be designed and constructed in accordance with the requirements of the State Department of Health, per Hawaii Administrative Rules (HAR), Title 11, Chapter 62, "Wastewater Systems." 4. After the fact permits We acknowledge your comment about permitting. We plan to comply with all required permitting requests and subsequent application fees throughout this process. This is not necessarily an environmental issue so not included in the EA. 5. NKCDP We acknowledge your comments regarding the impact on limited infrastructure and small-town feel, and the overall goal of the NKCDP. We believe that through the preservation of Puakea Ranch these intentions are achieved. This is addressed in Section 3.6.5 of the EA. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA, please contact me at (808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch 2 CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 3 Miv os HarryKim t': •David Yamamoto,P.E. e t • Director ayor Wil Okabeh°." Allan G.Simeon,P.E. Managing Director Deputy Director CM* of Rainat`t DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS Aupuni Center 10.1 Pauahi Street.Suite 7•'Hilo,Hawaii 96720-4224 808)961-8321 •Fax(808)961-8630 public_works@hawaiicounty.gov MEMORANDUM Date: September 18, 2019 To: Alex Roy, Planning Department From: Department of Public Works, Engineering Division-11,'" Subject:Draft Environmental Assessment for Puakea Guest Ranch Special Permit TMK 5-6-001:082 North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii We have reviewed the subject Draft Environmental Assessment and have no comments. Should there be any questions concerning this matter, please feel free to contact Natalie Whitworth of our Kona Engineering Division office at 323-4853. NW Copy: ENG-HILO/KONA Jim Pedersen (via email) Ron Terry (via email) County of Hawaii is an Equal Opportunity Provider and Employer. 71 s P 27 Pfd 2 114 NCarter Collins P.O. Box 485 v Kapaadi HjI 96755 September 23, 2019 Planning Director Michael Yee County of Hawaii Planning Department 101 Pauahi Street, Suite 3 Hilo, Hawaii 96720 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment (DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch -- TMK (3) 5-6-001;082 Puakea, North Kohala Dear Director Yee, My name is Carter Collins and I am a six year resident of North `Kohala, having migrated here in 2013 from Northern California_ I support the letter and spirit of Toni Withington's written testimony (dated September 23, 2019) regarding the contested matter of pending litigation County of Hawai'i v. Christine Cash et al. As a member of North Kohala's Growth Management Group, I am especially sensitive to the treatment of and reverence for native lands here in Hawaii. When an owner ignores the land's history and spirit in the name of profit, I am compelled to speak out. Reflecting on last year's budget hearings for Hawaii County, I am reminded of the painful volcano induced deficit in the amount of $5.1 million the finance committee was confronted with as they tried to balance our budget. The fines accessed to Christine Cash, for example would go a long way toward helping mitigate the amount tax payers would have to make up, approximately 11.76% of that deficit. Carter Collins SCANNED OCT 0 4 20r ___ AA tgti AKONI PULE HhGHWAY HAWi,HAWAii 967q gob•}iy'o oq WWW,PUAKEARANCH.COM October 28, 2019 Carter Collins PO BOX 485 Kapa'au, HI 96755 Subject: Comments on Draft Environmental Assessment(DEA) for Puakea Guest Ranch TMK(3)5-6-001:082,North Kohala, Island of Hawai`i Dear Mr. Carter: Thank you for your comment email dated September 23, 2019, in which you stated a concern about the current enforcement action as well as the treatment ofnative lands. Thank you for recognizing the importance of these items. The environmental assessment(EA)was prepared with this understanding. Each item is addressed specifically in the DEA with proposed mitigation measures where appropriate. Your comments are summarized below, along with our responses to each below this added personal comment: You have a 20+year history with Puakea Ranch manager, Mr. Joshua Alt. When you came for dinner with Mr. Alt's mother, at Yoshi's House, you were very complimentary of our preservation and restoration efforts and our dedication to community agricultural and development/growth values. Now, it would appear that you are using a volunteer position on the CDP committee and Toni Withington's long standing reputation as a community activist,fighting any growth, to manipulate the county planning commission,based on personal feelings associated with the fact that your relationship with Mr. Alt's mother changed after your August 2018 birthday that we all attended, including Mrs. Withington. As such, your comment letter to the director suggests to me,you have more ofa personal vendetta than a concern for the historic and cultural preservation, environmental impacts or the highest and best use of the historic Puakea Ranch Headquarters, formally managed and then owned by Parker Ranch for 100 years before selling off 220 acres to a local developer in 2002. 1. Current enforcement action The County ofHawaii legally requires the preparation of an EA before accepting the submittal of a special permit application. Without satisfaction of the Hawai'i Revised Statutes (HRS) Chapter 343 process, a special permit cannot be considered by the Planning Commission. We are simply 1 conforming with legal requirements by preparing an EA prior to a special permit. These issues will be considered at the special permit venue. 2. Cultural and historical resources We acknowledge your comment regarding cultural and historical resources and share your concerns. We envision the Puakea Guest Ranch as a key component of preserving a vital part of Kohala's architectural heritage in a functioning state and to protect and preserve these resources. This is addressed throughout including in Sections 3.2.2 and 3.2.3 as well as in both Appendix 2 and 3 ofthe EA. In addition, the Hawai`i State Historic Preservation Division(SHPD)has been engaged throughout this process. An example of that is demonstrated in Appendix 4. We very much appreciate your review of the document. If you have any questions about the EA,please contact me at(808) 315-0805. Sincerely, Christie Cash Proprietor The Historic Puakea Ranch CC: Jeff Darrow, [via Jeff.Darrow@hawaiicounty.gov only] 2 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawai`i Appendix 2 Cultural Impact Assessment Report 1516-011819 CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PUAKEA RANCH PUAKEA AHUPUA`A NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF HAWAII TMK: (3) 5-6-001:POR. 082 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 Report 1516-011819 CULTURAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT PUAKEA RANCH PUAKEA AHUPUA'A NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT ISLAND OF HAWAI'I TMK: (3) 5-6-001:POR. 082 By: Haun & Associates Prepared for: Christie Cash, Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway Hawi, Hawai'i 96719 January 2019 HAUN & ASSOCIATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL,AND HISTORICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES 73-4161 KAAo ROAD, KAILUA-KONA HI 96740 PHONE: 808-325-2402 FAX: 808-325-1520 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 SUMMARY At the request of Christie Cash, Haun &Associates conducted a cultural impact assessment(CIA)of a 14.92 acre portion of TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082; a 32.411 acre parcel in Puakea Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i. The objective of the assessment is to identify any culturally significant resources or traditional cultural practices that occurred within the project area and its immediate vicinity. The assessment relies upon archival research focused on historical documents, previous archaeology studies, previous cultural impact assessment reports, and oral interviews. This assessment addresses potential cultural impacts that future development could have on any traditional cultural practices or resources following the framework set forth by the Hawaii Supreme Court in the case of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs.the Hawai'i State Land Use Commission (LUC). Puakea Ranch and its vicinity were in use by Parker Ranch for more than 70 years. Masa Kawamoto was born and raised on the ranch and would often help his mother as she worked around the ranch. He once recalled that he would often go bird hunting with his brother to help his mother whenever the ranch owners would throw parties. Farming and bird hunting were traditional activities practiced by the local ranch families. Michael Gomes, a local historian and author, stated that the only activities that took place on Puakea Ranch were associated with cattle ranching. Those activities ceased at Puakea Ranch once Parker Ranch sold its Puakea holdings and the families were asked to leave. No traditional cultural practices or properties were identified within the project area and the proposed usage of the property will not have a negative impact on any potential traditional cultural practices or properties located in the vicinity of Puakea Ranch. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I ii TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Table of Contents INTRODUCTION 1 Scope of Work 1 Project Area Description 1 Methods 4 BACKGROUND 11 Historical Documentary Research 11 Previous Archaeological Research 28 Previous Ethnographic Research 30 FINDINGS 31 CONCLUSION 33 REFERENCES 34 APPENDIX A: LAND COMMISSION AWARDS IN PUAKEA AHUPUA'A(FROM WAIHONA'AINA) 37 APPENDIX B—WEST HAWAII TODAY AND KA WAI OLA PUBLIC NOTICES 43 FIGURES Figure 1. Portion of 1995 USGS 7.5' Hawi Quadrangle showing project area 2 Figure 2.Tax Map Key(3)5-6-001 showing project area 3 Figure 3. May 15,2018 aerial view of project area vicinity from Google Earth 4 Figure 4.Current extent of Puakea Ranch 5 Figure 5.The Cowboy House(view to northeast) 6 Figure 6.The Toy Box(view to east) 6 Figure 7.Yoshi's House(view to north-northeast) 7 Figure 8.Entry to Puakea Ranch from Akone Pule Highway(view to north-northeast) 7 Figure 9.Tree-lined driveway leading to Yoshi's House(view to southeast) 8 Figure 10.Vegetable garden(view to north)8 Figure 11. Maintained lawn (view to southeast) 9 Figure 12. Maintained lawn(view to southeast) 9 Figure 13. Ahupua'a boundaries 12 Figure 14. Map of the North Kohala District from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:4) 13 Figure 15, Map of the North Kohala District at Contact from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:17) 14 Figure 16.Tomonari-Tuggle's(1998) map of the Kohala Field System showing project area 16 Figure 17. Portion of Lydgate's 1893 Hawaii Register Map 1705 20 Figure 18. Map of the North Kohala District in the Later 19th Century from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:41) 22 Figure 19. February 13, 1920 article from The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(from newspapers.com) 23 Figure 20. February 9,2932 articles from The Honolulu Advertiser(from newspapers.com) 26 Figure 21. Portion of 1930 USGS Hawi Quadrangle showing project area 27 Figure 22. 1976 USGS aerial photograph of project area vicinity 27 Figure 23. Previous archaeological work 29 Figure 24. Masatsu Kawamoto at Puakea in the home he was born in(courtesy of Christie Cash,taken 30 Oct 2018) 31 TABLES Table 1. Land Grants in Puakea Ahupua'a 18 Table 2. Previous archaeological work in Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas 30 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I iii TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 INTRODUCTION At the request of Christie Cash, Haun & Associates conducted a cultural impact assessment (CIA) of a 14.92 acre portion of TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082; a 32.411 acre parcel in Puakea Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The objective of this CIA is to identify any culturally significant resources or traditional cultural practices that occurred within the project area and its immediate vicinity. The CIA relies upon archival research focused on historical documents, previous archaeology studies, previous CIA reports, and oral interviews. This assessment addresses potential cultural impacts that future development could have on any traditional cultural practices or resources following the framework set forth by the Hawai'i Supreme Court in the case of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs. the Hawai'i State Land Use Commission (LUC).This CIA attempted to make specific findings concerning: The identity and scope of "valued cultural, historical and natural resources" in the petition area, including the extent to which traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights are exercised in the petition area; The extent to which those resources, as well as traditional and customary native Hawaiian rights,will be affected or impaired by the proposed action;and The feasible action, if any, to be taken by the agency to reasonably protect native Hawaiian rights, if they are found to exist. This CIA is prepared in conjunction with a Special Use Permit application for the County of Hawaii Planning and Building Departments. The landowners propose to operate the Puakea Ranch as a "Guest Ranch". The CIA was conducted between August and December 2018. Described in this report are the project scope of work, methods, background information, CIA findings, potential impacts to traditional cultural practices,and mitigation efforts if applicable. Scope of Work In order to satisfy Act 50 of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka `Aina vs. Land Use Commission the following specific tasks were determined to constitute an appropriate scope of work for the project: 1. Conduct background review and research of existing ethnographic, historical, anthropological, sociological documentary literature relating to traditional cultural practices and resources in the project area and its immediate vicinity. 2. Identify and consult with individuals and organizations to identify knowledgeable individuals with expertise concerning the types of cultural resources, practices, and beliefs found in the vicinity of the project area 3. Conduct ethnographic/oral historical interviews with knowledgeable individuals;and 4. Prepare and submit a CIA Report Project Area Description The project area is an irregularly-shaped 14.92 acre area located within Puakea Ranch at elevations ranging from approximately 530 to 605 feet. The elevations presented in this report are in feet above mean sea level(AMSL). Figure 3 is an aerial view of the project area taken on May 15,2018. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 1 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 NWI Map Location Up HONOKAA WAIMEAy HILO et KAILUA ar`.r — KEALAKEKUA p OA e° I r,. r Thr, ttt PAHALA 4 140 Tanks I Op%C e\ -_ ter'-• I AALEHU V011i r- ler ---=1 6 ilik„,:.' , isb. _ i rn 1 f G j l Illaib \s L).-:;\----.--: ` tel \ Y l off'1 i NA,Ce t i spy, Sitlb 1 .1 uisper.i...,a a ,..... „, 0,4. fel ` O ( 0 1F 7\--5 KOh' ip7 Species se permit,arfea . -- PuaateaFrets 441 ' .I l / . rTh 4 i tr---^ tib I W , 1u\,,,,‹ ,j f; 1 6000ft,--_ HOLA HISTORICAL SITES '7i f P l s 11 I STATE MONU ENT 7. u u r 2i0m„ Figure 1.Portion of 1995 USGS 7.5'Hawi Quadrangle showing project area HAUN &ASSOCIATES 12 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 g as 0<o910f> n 2 41'.-1 2 5 j41- c1 zu 01e 1 i 1\.G 1.''' \ \ \of 100N, ze' w a w Y s.a r s.. i 1 'twti a it` R t o v. O W I d : 0 0 /., k. \ z;;;, 0 .01.4,''''.1 \ '' f'''', ' ' 4 t dos6yreri,... . . . -At . ,r° j N\ a 1( d\ 4,.., I% rii.j. ski 1. 2\ 1 v.t/ ! rttu_ Lam. ozk 0 1 „ 6 < 1 a t, ... t LI tri I t 4' '-"... x. i ,,! . a0 \.. C 40 CO_ Z1 1 , : r4Q` \\ ,, 11,11...... !i j} a G O 41\,\ IL-'1 ‘ 5 1:, 3 i,y t to ,o 2 dS x •m Q s. .Ili? o'0 3' t i f a xi lai. d ,+ <L t ate _ot® i=o I C i? inI0v„ q j Y„.i/t- 1 1,11` Q /,,e, g lett FJO o L. 0 zraj m 2 ai cle 1. ',1 4 a —l1 LL HAUN &ASSOCIATES 13 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 s orf s 11 f t,Xt yr E,%,; TMK.(3)`5.6 Figure 3.May 15,2018 aerial view of project area vicinity from Google Earth The Puakea Ranch headquarters was purchased by Christie Cash and her partner James Nelson in 2005. Their desire was to create a "low impact, eco-minded, low-density place for families that was an alternative to the resorts." (https://keolamagazine.com). She took great efforts to restore the ranch buildings to their original condition and today the Puakea Ranch provides overnight accommodations for tourists.The area was informally recorded by the landowners in a June 2009 National Register of Historic Places Registration Form.The ranch buildings were subsequently assigned SIHP Site designation 50-10-2- 9107. The current extent of the facility, comprising the 32.411 acre TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 is depicted in Figure 4.The buildings consist of following: The Saddle House,James Cottage (built 1920s), The Cowboy House (1880s; Figure 5), The Toy Box (Figure 6), The Tool Shed, The Chicken Coop, The Tree House, Yoshi's House(1940s; Figure 7)and Miles Away(1930s). The special use permit area is accessed by a gravel and dirt driveway that extends inland from the Akoni Pule Highway(Figure 8) and a java plum tree-lined driveway(Figure 9) leads Yoshi's House at the eastern end of the property.The project area is bordered on the east, west and portions of the north and south sides by rock walls. It encompasses the structures described above along with a vegetable garden (Figure 10), a pavilion, and pasture. The majority of the project area is comprised of a maintained grass lawn Figure 11 and Figure 12) and areas of dense guinea grass (Panicum maximum), with stands of koa haole Leucaena glauca)and kiawe(Prosopis pallida).Additional vegetation in the project area consists of night- blooming cereus (Hylocereus undatus), hibiscus (Hibiscus tiliaceus), macadamia nut (Macadamia integrifolia), royal poinciana (Delonix regia),java plum (Syzygium cumini), monkey pod (Samanea saman), dragonfruit(Hylocereus undatus),and various ornamental plants. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 4 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Iie II 1 r, 1 4 I,I I i il Iii 1I • 111TOR.c 14E011-T1x I 40)-- if'--..%:':::".: : 4,,,—;:**"0,' , 'EC • . N iii/i 11 •d'...1 1 it # *ItZ0./ 41 •.77,.,'! ru.,4 ' I, i . ' (M1M.. , ,--. L. ,cvigoyNckE c Ito: _ 41'-''' ilito 40,10 Mi! 1 1 1 T'AerroY Box-- - .,1 06147 Ill, It . t 1 I I r) °'Tc.c.c„Aci1 , ir ,.....- - Special use permit ; a itt i 1 ... _ z-.... Iti ‘v;4711 atf EuCWYPTU, At ,_7,1 „, .. ; ye....v_IAG.EP rOVelIi,. 11 , I - 1 A., (31- - • ' i, r:-.fi, 0 21;:_'' k ,. ) ,*44,, '—' tl.--* ;IpOrrbLE.,_AwAy.' . t... 1 1i,. - 1 4.TE Xietts.f NATIVE WNWA IAN l'OPPY 1 1 I . 1 gib ,....1 1,1•E OCAPA, 1 e0 111,4111E11 1 1 Figure 4.Current extent of Puakea Ranch HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 5 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 k. r , r/ tAird IAq '' tit n a 4.44 v-. ."1'w f T Ma dry i Figure 5.The Cowboy House(view to northeast) W hfi ," fir. i. I "45:44, 44gi'til;4 ";2-"'l', 040.'''' - , ,`Ait--;:'';a'' .°., , ii 4.,, 7 h 7,-,,t,-. , „..,,,,,„ ,,,. 1 „,.., ,-‘1,.,,,-;',..&, i,,,,p,.54,,, Litilml 1999 k , -:,-2K 1 t I # I. eta Figure 6.The Toy Box(view to east) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 16 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 m •`ice,... ,_ v,e 410110111101001111010114110000 Figure 7.Yoshi's House(view to north-northeast) Figure 8.Entry to Puakea Ranch from Akone Pule Highway(view to north-northeast) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 17 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 odr tom c, F4 e y W l .,A s g#,j. Fa k fit _ is #: Zr' T.,x ri ALl 4., Figure 9.Tree-lined driveway leading to Yoshi's House(view to southeast) 3 Figure 10.Vegetable garden(view to north) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 18 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Y r^ Y Figure 11. Maintained lawn(view to southeast) tilt. 9! v Z. Vi • Figure 12.Maintained lawn(view to southeast) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 19 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Methods Archival research was conducted at the Hamilton Library Hawaii and Pacific Collection at the University of Hawaii-Manoa, the University of Hawaii-Hilo Hawaiian Collection, the Land Survey Office and the Archives Division of the Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services, the Bishop Museum Archives, State Historic Preservation Division library, State Survey Division, and the Hawaii State Public Libraries in Honolulu and Hilo. Informal "talk story" interviews were conducted with knowledgeable individuals in a manner that allowed the individual to discuss the issues that were most important to them about the project area and the proposed project. The individuals that chose to participate in this CIA were residents of Kohala and were knowledgeable about the area. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 110 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 BACKGROUND Historical Documentary Research The project area is situated in the ahupua'a of Puakea near the end of Hawai'i Island (Figure 13). The project area is located within the boundaries of the historic Puakea Ranch headquarters area and is situated approximately 100 meters inland of the Akoni Pule Highway (Highway 270). The project area is located approximately 800 meters seaward of Puu Ula.An unnamed puu or hill is located adjacent to the project area to the north. Puakea is literally translated as "white blossom" (Pukui, Elbert and Mookini 1976: 191). The ahupua'a originates at the shoreline between Puakea Point and Hianaula Point and extends inland 4,100 meters 2.5 miles) to approximately 1,240 ft elevation. It is bordered on the north by Honoipu Ahupua'a and on the south by Kukuipahu Ahupua'a. Tomonari-Tuggle (1988) presents a comprehensive historical overview of the North Kohala district, separating the area into two distinct geographic zones; the windward and leeward areas which are divided by the ridges of the Kohala Mountain range in a northwest by southeast direction (Figure 14).This line extends between Pu'u Kahone in the northwest to Pu'u Pili in the southeast and serves as the demarcation between the dry leeward side and the relatively wet windward side. The project area is located in the leeward area.According to Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:5): The long ridge of Kohala Mountain lies perpendicular to the predominant moisture- laden northeast trade winds and acts as a deflector, pushing the trades upward, where the resultant cooling condenses the moisture,forming clouds and rain over the summit. The rainfall decreases on the leeward side as the air warms in its return to lower elevations. High rainfall is centered over the head of the windward valleys, where average measurement is 200 inches. At the mouth of the Honokane Nui Valley, it is 60 to 80 inches, decreasing northward toward Hawi where it is 50 inches per year. On the leeward side, median annual rainfall is approximately 60 inches at Pu'u Hue, which is 579 m (1900 ft) above sea level (Taliaferro 1959:136-137) and approximately 13 inches at Mahukona at the coast. (Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:132-133). Tomonari-Tuggle cites several historical accounts that document the extensive agricultural use of Kohala.The extent of the agricultural fields at contact is presented in Figure 15. According to this figure, the project area is located in the area of non-irrigated agriculture.The During Lt. King's 1779 exploration of the Kohala region,he states: The country, as far as the eye could reach, seemed fruitful and well inhabited...[three and four miles inland, plantations of taro and potatoes and wauke] neatly set out in rows. The walls that separate them are made of the loose burnt stone, which are got in clearing the ground; and being entirely concealed by sugarcanes planted close on each side, make the most beautiful fences that can be conceived. [The exploring party stopped six or seven miles from the sea] at the second but they found among the plantations...To the left a continuous range of villages, interspersed with groves of coconut trees spreading along the sea-shore;a thick wood behind this;and to the right,an extent of ground laid out in regular and well-cultivated plantations,as far as the eye could reach(cited in Tominari-Tuggle1988:16-18). HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 11 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Upolu Airport% j 7 y A Limukoko Point; A 7 1 V vv f 7- Umiwai Bay \ 1 f\ 4 J N m `` \ V t. A N N Upolu Airport Road-\ 9 N. m \ N A V - N N_ A' \N. vv vv. N o' \ N-' v N V A 5 V A N N. r. \ o \--- vv N s N N.v 14 \ \i, \ N N.N AL` N N. 4 \ 9 \ v N A A — \ G A N. Avg 92 Fq \\ \ Honoipu Landing 04. N. 9 N.ON N. N.. Puakea Point- AN AOC V A Holana Bay A N A I 7---)1 Akoni Pule Hwy 1 V (Hwy 270) 4O N Y----A N ix, G • \Aovt/4 Eq N.V A 4 v A V 1-- v v A o4 \ /800 1rA mArcRFs1PAspecialuse \JN r \ S permit area • I‘)))-Z), 4 5--) TMK:(3)5.8.001;062; V A v v \\Os N J A\ KUKUIPAHu i v N A f Kohala Ditch \ il/__) v1000 Akoni Pule Hwy 3 Hwy 270) , I .r 4 I I 1 2 J 600 1 AWALUA i Contour Interval=200 ft 0 400 -- 3000R Ahupua'a Boundary 200 u t000m Ditch Figure 13. Ahupua'a boundaries HAUN 8c ASSOCIATES 112 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 NPo14+ Pa. IGOI•IAL.A 'Ii; ,.FiquR.E. I. THE DISTRACT OF NORTH KOS-AL A Dhd1 ISLAND OF NAWAI'Ic t ' wow. MUD O i 2. E 4 KM. r; -':,/... ', Puma `' 16149.4 1tpotu Pt 1(i u6 WINOWAQA KNLA DOPED S. WIPIPW2= NonniY i J i S l Ksahota Pt.fir,,: fKanoncfj ••• 4;• 14,144Dal, Oa•ET) NAWi ii I, KAPA'A14 vaPan Ll SaY Project 1 / f r Doi StJ NMI-0 Nsw•Day area I /lie wataw•e• I t ' I o Veleta I j for I Nonokant Nai i Mihukona t l S1 Koai't. Pdo NW Me. fQ S•2!3 P.s Kahan c 1T52.FT)• z aL3hikaota1 ( x 13383. C 12EiKARP zfili tet\\-- •Pdu P111 Kaawanin bay J/ / ... r= ••CrK? f fJr oaP, F Wa.ka'iho ear 9°a 7 N Kai'ppat Figure 14.Map of the North Kohala District from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:4) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 113 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 MCIOKJNI >;QIAM o. °. 0. KAUICA PT. c -.oto v-...• ---.% :Ly 1.:-- 3 3 7 ? 7---. C°-o. r S ? °` ,,- s KEOKEA BAY I .-. Prof .........„--/-- r 3. 0 ?:V '/ , o0. area r' ioug„, k4 i'" 4.4/ A i, A NEVE 6AY KUIPAHU--- —- -,--.- `.?r`•t ......0Z `mo i NAr• AwA -/ H IAN r %-' i %i-! ' + -, —% K.APUN6Pury ` r, u O......---""''',..../....'; -. ' - •:y iuw '/ POtllW`jar f, mo i- i/f ' _i v •HONOKTINE. J`MANq` . N4N4WNHI ' r T PM4KA ii-- y/ i NUNu_:%w.,1 MJF -f'NIAHNL'UNA NIA Q: ^fi 9 i atG ,—• A -.......-:.> LAMALOLD i OA II Lpah,%~ 1— i _ AL.,:..." J G i--"c.= y[i.1 "--,--!...."......-":„../g ...-- [c11.7.74. PSP err w.. JN LAMALDL.OA p• °° i'I Z Itt,P j-..'rte yam .0 4yJ` iHGIA F Llthrlu•II i SA w4ti.4.4,. ?. QJ 41'O OY7 '" 'KJ\NMA 1 S ver 5-;_:. ]:::: :e O I AWANNI air( , 7 v' ?' Pier•,I, L f....1......• C. r PJ S 4- 1. P'oa i 1 aL 1 WAIAKA'TLJO BA'( IP` a FIGUfzE, 3. NOR,TN K©NALA AT CONTACT KAI' PA!_ ThE. LATE. lath GENTUR.Y KNOwN AREAS OF SETTLtM NT M o INFERR:.p AREAS OF ;ETTLCMCNT AQLL6 OF NONIRRIGATED C4iticiALTrik.e. ra.lam AREAS Of IRRIGATED AGQIENLTNM. o r Z 3 Mt A NEIALI1111011111.11*" 0 *' 2 3 q ••I KAMua AHUPHA'A 0 LINDER :ANE. OUP:IA.6 NAMC5 FROM 4345 KOHALA "PON CHURCH MCM6CR5NIP 130otc, I.?CATIDN TpKtN FROM A13 1,15615 TOPO4RAN IC. WY-'=' ' SEEIES Figure 15,Map of the North Kohala District at Contact from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:17) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 114 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Similar observations were made in 1793 by Archibald Menzies and in 1823 by William Ellis.According to Ellis, Streams of water were frequent, and a large quantity of ground was cultivated on their banks, and in the vicinity(1963:19)",and Menzies states: From the north-west point of the island ['Upolu Point], the country stretches back for a considerable distance with a very gradual ascent, and is destitute of trees or bushes of any kind. But it bears every appearance of industrious cultivation by the number of small fields into which it is laid out(cited in Tominari-Tuggle1988:20). As indicated above,the project area is located in Tomonari-Tuggle's(1998) Leeward area.The agricultural use of this area is characterized by a," ...massive field system [the Kohala field system] which sweeps across the leeward slopes of Kohala [and] reaches the coast at the ahupua'a of Kukuipahu" (1988:11-23). This field system extended from the shoreline inland to the forests, and was characterized by cross slope walls designed to block the prevailing trade winds. Using aerial photographs, Tomonari-Tuggle created a map depicting the extent of the Kohala Field System (Figure 16). As indicated in this figure, the present project area is located along the northern fringes of the complex. The North Kohala District is of particular significance as the birthplace of Kamehameha I, who was born just to the south Mo`okini Heiau (see Figure 15).The district was also the place where his armies gathered to prepare for war and was a training ground for young warriors (1'1 1959:15). According to the National Park Service website, the Mo'okini Heiau is one of the first luakini or sacrificial heiau in the Hawaiian Islands. It is described as follows: Tradition says that a temple was first built on the northernmost tip of the Island of Hawai'i sometime in the 5th century by the high priest Mo'okini. Later oral tradition says that the current heiau was built on the older temple between the 13th and 14th centuries by Pa'ao, a legendary priest from either Tahiti or Samoa who is said to have introduced the Hawaiians to human sacrifice, the walled heiau, and several types of kapu—the system of religious, political, and social laws that governed every aspect of daily life. Pa'ao was said to have lived near Mo'okini Heiau and founded a lineage of priests that served the ali'i 'ai moku (paramount chief) of the Island of Hawaii through the early part of the 19th century. Ancient Hawaiians had many types of heiau, each with their own distinct function and use by particular segments of society.Heiau ranged in size from single upright stones to massive and complex structures. Larger heiau were built by ali'i(chiefs), but the largest and most complex, the luakini heiau (sacrificial temple), could only be constructed and dedicated by an ali'i'ai moku.Luakini heiau were reserved for rituals involving human or animal sacrifice and were generally dedicated to the war god Ku. Rituals performed at a luakini heiau highlighted the ali'i 'ai moku's spiritual, economic, political, and social control over his lands and his authority over the life and death of his people. Mo'okini Heiau was active through the early part of the 19th century and was Kamehameha 1's war temple, housing his family's war god Ku-ka-'ili-moku before the transfer of the god to Kamehameha's new war temple Pu'ukohola Heiau, 21 miles down the coast near Kawaihae. Kamehameha I's son and heir Liholiho also used Mo'okini Heiau. In 1819, after his father's death, Liholiho ended kapu and abolished that part of the Hawaiian religion that depended on heiau. In spite of royal orders that they be destroyed, Mo'okini and several other large heiau were spared. It was believed that they had acquired mana(spiritual energy),which protected them against human destruction. https://www.nps.gov) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 115 TM K: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 411 i iIt gtuarua ntt t I _` 11111"1" fillllirStoillipgLink IHVNV8a; 'triallinj miond(fft 4.41it, y it{ I ill I 1 l 'in 1 tlfilik MD" I i401in, .4t 3 T i '.' r '›inir A 11 1 I 02,11111/IMMONEATELlib,„11--. t i .-----'---____ 41 tiy1l' 1 t 0 tl1 1AV iiete j 111 y lp• OO min_N3 I 1 t j -- u11{ I .,t ,R Nig a liaa " i; I1411 ll lef flet all/ "" t i 3 cu PI tv , llIli" 011 1-4 t,1,a,fEatN f ]/ In a K ms- 11 1( I f j + 'ems". 2 u2J t ( j 1 fit iiin 4 t r Irl! 0 Z= 1 j{ 0. Qp a4 tt111z o-1 tIL/ ZZ x NMI J r >` comQILr,',..'n. g t! LI II / / g 77,J a J ytttQ t o Y ` Q =u 1/ l+ta.lj PIT 8 eo Q h ' 1 7 "trite % 3 c1Ga )- - < ft! 4,44.4i444,14111 ce .J d C3 J j' f, f0 N . S 5 1s f 04 S 5 fl7 tJ H iii SO.uic7t' o j o iL .JQv -O o I)a 3 1-111UN &ASSOCIATES I 16 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 In January 1778 Cook landed in Waimea, Kaua'i and the culture of old Hawaii began its spiraling change Day 1992). Cook left Hawaii for several months, but returned later in the year. Kalani'opu'u was fighting Kahekili's forces in Wailua,Maui on November 19, 1778 when Cook's ship was sighted on his return trip to the islands. Kalani'opu'u visited Cook on the Resolution, while Kahekili visited Clerke on the Discovery Kuykendall and Day 1976:16). When Cook sailed into Kealakekua Bay on January 17, 1779, Kalani'Opu'u was still fighting Kahekili on Maui.At this time Kahekili's brother Ka`eo-kulani was ruling chief of Kaua'i; Ka-hahana was ruling chief of O'ahu and Molokai; Kahekili'ahumanu of western Maui, Lanai and Kaho'olawe; and Kalani'Opu'u was ruling chief of Hawaii and Nana (Kamakau, 1992:84-86, 92, 97-98). On January 25th Kalani'Opu'u visited Cook again at Kealakekua Bay, presenting him with several feather cloaks. In February Cook's plan to kidnap Kalani'opu'u as a hostage was thwarted and Cook was killed following a skirmish over a stolen cutter(Kuykendall and Day 1976:18). Following contact with Westerners, the population of North Kohala declined significantly. According to State Statistician Schmitt (1977:27), between 1832and 1835, the population in this area declined 26%. This decline was due in large part to the introduction of diseases by the early visitors. This decline accompanied a shift in settlement away from the leeward coasts to the interior and to windward areas. The economy of the islands experienced change as industry and capitalism emerged.The sandalwood trade was established by Euro-Americans in 1790 and by 1805 had become a burgeoning enterprise(Oliver 1961). By the 1820's, the sandalwood trade was wreaking havoc on the commoners who were weakening with the heavy production, exposure, and famine just to fill the coffers of the ali'i who were no longer under any control constraints (Oliver 1961:261; Kuykendall and Day 1976:42; Bushnell 1993:212). The lack of control of the sandalwood trade was to soon create the first Hawaiian national debt as promissory notes and levies were initiated by American traders and enforced by American warships(Oliver 1961:261, 262). In the 1820s, the sandalwood trade was at its peak and every tree found was cut for its value. The forests of Kohala,which reached almost to the Kawaihae shore as late as 1815, contained an abundance of the coveted wood,presumably the dry land species"(n.a. 1967:16). The Hawaiian culture was well on its way towards Western assimilation as industry in Hawaii went from the sandalwood trade, to a short-lived whaling industry, to cattle ranching, and the more lucrative, but insidious sugar industry. Sugar cane was grown on all islands and when Cook arrived, he wrote of seeing sugar cane plantations. The Chinese on Lanai are credited with first producing sugar as early as 1802; however,it was not until 1835 that sugar became established commercially, primarily to replace a waning sandalwood industry(Oliver 1961:263; Kuykendall and Day 1976:92). 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 10th 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 MOhele. 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. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 117 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 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 Land Commission Awards (LCA) during the Mahele. This database indicates that two claims were made in Puakea Ahupua'a. LCA 8746 was claimed by Keawe and LCA 8879B by Kamalamailalo. Only LCA 8879B was subsequently awarded. The location of this LCA is not depicted on available tax maps of the area. LCAs 8746 and 8879B are presented in detail in Appendix A. LCA 8746 to Keawe describes an enclosed house lot with two houses, in the 'ili of Laleakone with two houses on it surrounded by public land. The land passed from Keohokalole to Kekuannui and from Kekuanui to Keawe. LCA 8879B to Kamalamailalo describes a fenced house lot with five houses,three of which were owned by Kamalamailalo and two that were owned by his father Kaulemamoku,The land was owned by Kamalamailalo since the time of Kamehameha I. The land of Puakea (and the surrounding ahupua'a) were divided into land grants between 1852 and 1862. Figure 17 is a portion of Lydgate's 1893 Hawai'i Register Map 1705 showing the project area obtained from the Archives Division of the Hawaii Department of Accounting and General Services http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search). This map indicates that there are nine grants in Puakea Ahupua'a. Table 1, compiled from information obtained the Waihona 'Aina (2000) Mahele Database indicates that these grants ranged in area from 18 to 320 acres. According to Figure 17, the majority of the Puakea Ranch Headquarters area (TMK: (3) 5-6-001) is situated in Grant 2361 to Henry Christenson, with a small portion located in Grant 1999 to Kahionamaka. The present project area is located in Grant 2361. Table 1.Land Grants in Puakea Ahupua'a Grant Grantee Ahupua'a Year obtained Grant acreage 744 Paahao Puakea 1 1852 50.2 745 Kaniho Puakea 1852 18 1549 Kaluhilau Puakea 2 1855 24.7 1550 Malamailalo Puakea 2 1855 88.5 1958 Papa Puakea 1855 19.32 1999 Kahionamaka Puakea 1856 107.65 2361 Henry Christiansen Puakea and Honoipu 1857 320 2777 Henere Puakea 1861 32 2848 Henry Christiansen Puakea,Honoipu and Lahuiiki 1862 77.3 By 1858 at least 2,119 foreigners lived in Hawaii. Many were merchants who traded and provided provisions, ranchers and missionaries, who lived in various locations throughout the islands. "Foreigners engaged in agricultural pursuits with the idea of reaping a profit from the land, in contrast with the Hawaiians, who carried on...subsistence agriculture" (Coulter 1971:11). In the 1860s, the U. S. Civil War brought about a boost for the sugar industry in Hawaii as sugar plantations in the South were boycotted or destroyed. And while Rev. Lorenzo Lyons was busy building churches; Imiola in Waimea, Hoku Loa at Puako and one at Kawaihae(n.a. 1967:18-19), Rev. Elias Bond was getting involved in the sugar business. In 1860, Rev. Bond engaged his "long-time acquaintance" (Stephenson 1977:7), Samuel N. Castle in founding the Kohala Sugar Company on lands owned by Bond and his neighbor Dr.James Wight.The first crop of the Kohala Sugar Company was harvested in January 1865(KTF 1975:69). Kohala's transition was a reflection of what was happening elsewhere in Hawaii, as the sugar industry grew. The industry brought HAUN &ASSOCIATES ( 18 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 in tens of thousands of laborers from Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa to work on the many plantations and mills that were being established on all major islands (Oliver 1961:123). Bond's influence on the expansion of the Kohala sugar industry is described by Tomonari-Tuggle: When Elias Bond directed his efforts to initiating sugar as a major agricultural industry in Kohala, he could not have foreseen the incredible success at his modest venture. His primary concern was to develop a means for Hawaiian people of the district to compete successfully in the market economy that had evolved in Hawaii. What resulted was a vigorous, stable, and competitive industry which survived over a century of changing economic situated. For the Hawaiian people,however,the impact was not what Bond anticipated. The "triumphant march" brought along not merely a strengthened economy but a new and prevailing resource,the sugar industry,which abruptly interrupted the process of indigenous adaptation to Westernization and instituted fundamental changes to the demographic composition of the community,to the organization of settlements,and to the patterns of land use. Kohala during this 50 year period was a frontier community characterized by a variety of people, settlements, and commercial ventures. Newcomers to the district were filling an economic void with numerous and diverse endeavors,from which only a few would emerge successful. The void presented a challenge and what already existed in the district was insignificant in terms of what could potentially develop. The nature of the community and the organization of land was drastically altered. The Hawaiian population,already decimated and outmigration,was insufficient of the needs of the market-oriented agriculture, and waves of immigrant labor from the Orient, Portugal, Puerto Rico and the Philippines arrived. Americans, British, and other northern Europeans came as managers and administrators. All were pioneers, leaving family, friends, and homes to seek better lives in the Kohala sugar frontier. The sugar mills and their associated plantations held a collective preeminence as major agents of change and development in the district.Kohala Sugar Company.Bond's model for economic security,was incorporated in 1863.After a decade of struggling,the company finally showed a credit balance in 1872, which coincided with the Reciprocity Treaty of 1876 between the United States and Hawaii.Although Bond maintained a paternal watch over the welfare of his congregation of laborers, his influence in the operation of the mill and plantation eventually waned before the demands of the profit-motive and his increasing age. By the time of Bond's death in 1896,the company was flourishing and competition had arisen in the form of five other sugar mills.Spurred on by the Reciprocity Treaty,sugar pioneers saw the potential of commercial development in Kohala. Dr.James Wight,one of the early haole residents of the district, started the first of the other mills in 1873 at Halawa. In 1874, Union Mill and Plantation Co.started by the Hinds of Maui and later headed by James Renton,was set up in Honomaka`u.Judge C.F. Hart,formerly of Kona, moved to Kohala to start Niuli'i in 1877; originally milling native-grown cane, he soon expanded into a field operation as well. R.R.and John Hind moved to Hawi after selling Union Mill and set up the Hawi Mill and Plantation Co. and its two sugar-growing subsidiaries, Puakea and Homesteads Plantations in 1881. In an effort to improve operations,the Hawi Company constructed the Hoea Mill in 1904,Star Mill in Kapa'au,operated only briefly in the 1880s.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:40-42) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 119 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Q‘„,1 • I V —/--- 17-1111. • w t,it `j 7 f. 1+ ice: 7l , f' AiIQ 447.,t lj K, i i`111) ` NIH ;r !/ r % 1 Cg 1 1 .-,1 ' /z. I1 H j ;c '-1 -rr,r Iy t 14 j I7 Ig l • 9/ ,.{::,,,. .,: y ham k., t.f., . ry ' © c w 5 v, i. / i4y I•ot f 4'Z'-': FFY • L t • 2 itEM LL HAUN &ASSOCIATES 120 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Figure 18 is Tomonari-Tuggle's(1988:41)map of the Kohala region in the later 19th Century depicting the above mentioned camps and mills.This map indicates that the project area was not under sugar cane cultivation.The burgeoning sugar industry also resulted in the development of a rail system used to transport the cane from the fields to mills. The demands of the successful sugar production stimulated the formation of two supportive enterprises. To service mills, the Hawaiian Railroad Company, started by S.G. Wilder in 1881 and completed in 1883, ran from Mahukona to Niuli'i over 17 trestles and almost 20 miles of rail. Previously dependent on ox-cart transport of cane to landings at Hapu'u Kauhola Pt.,and Honoipu,the mills,with one exception,now had efficient access to a landing at Mahukona on the sheltered lee side of the district. Hawi Mill continued to uses its landing at Honoipu. In 1884, the rail company carried 20,000 tons of freight and 6,000 passengers (Best 1978:43), proving itself a viable and nearly indispensable means of transportation. At the end of the century, the line was purchased by a conglomerate of plantations; again Hawi refused participation,although it eventually joined in 1912.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:42) In 1897, the Hawaiian Railroad Company was dissolved and a new company, the Hawaii Railway, was incorporated.The Hawaii Railway was sold in 1899 to the four Kohala sugar plantations that it served(Union Mill,Halawa Plantation,Kohala Plantation,and Niuli'i Plantation).The Hawi Mill and Plantation preferred to haul cane by wagon to its landing at Honoipu until 1912 when it also purchased a share of the railroad. Passenger service by the railroads ended by 1920 as automobiles became more common. The Hawaii Railway was dis- incorporated in 1937 and reincorporated as the Mahukona terminals.The railroad was eventually abandoned in 1939 (Best 1978:42-48). As indicated in Figure 18 the portion of the railroad in Puakea Ahupua'a is located approximately 1,100 meters seaward of the project area Not everyone was in favor the railroad and its impact the community.Conde cites an 1882 letter from a farmer whose land was being: ruthlessly destroyed by the railroad overseers of S.G.Wilder.This act is equal to that of plain murder, because the livelihood of myself and my family is reduced to nothing, that is. My plants and that of my family are covered with dirt,the taro, banana,ti leaves,coffee, mango, orange,bamboo,and other plants.My property is filled with fruits,but these days it is reduced to naught.(Conde 1971:40) The expansion of the Kohala sugar industry in the 1920s and 1930s required a significant labor force and immigrants primarily from China and Portugal began arriving. The camps where the immigrants lived were typically located in close proximity to the fields so that the workers could walk to work(Schweitzer 2003). In order to supply the needs of the burgeoning immigrant population a variety of associated business emerged. The population of the region went into decline, due in part to young people being lured from the country to larger towns and cities, especially Honolulu. Between 1940 and 1950 the population declined 17% to 4,456 people. By 1960, there were only 3,386 people in Kohala (Schmitt 1977:12). In 1975 the Kohala Mill closed its doors because of the declining population and disputes between the unions and management. As discussed above, Henry Christensen purchased Grant 2361 (location of project area) and Grant 2848 in the interior of Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas (see Figure 17). A sheep ranch was initially established along with some sugarcane cultivation; however, the latter was unsuccessful due to the crude equipment available at the time(Henke 1929:41). HAUN &ASSOCIATES 121 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 HOEA © MIU. NCFJI MONDIPI4 4;y:.':.UNION ... K,OIrALA LHDC. LNDCf. MILL NAPN'N LNDC}4:...,70 Projec A Nommaw". KDHALA`rLaw" area. o r. . wAWi +1• MILL Q KEDKG LHDy. wAuwA uucea a v+cw MILL Kapal„ ,4 .,P;.., itsia+ ar., hwu`I STAR HALAwAA. MILL. t;; , MILL. NIULJ I s- r:` si :r 1:i:•:1„'.: MILL t"' *" _• 4;•.':('baC i4:c 0.' ••_..:;J•• o DOLOal1 IiCL GO. e SHGAR. FIELDS I rAL6.1KON. ilAiLoaR, iwI nl GPFLL,nom- I.r.D STOGic CA~ '( a IPU14MYCI?.hMC.$ - f 1 f D KAwkiA 4NC1.1 I./."....3 FIGURE 6. NO2TH CONALA IN THE LAT . 19th CENTL ( i b SuCaAR. MILL. TOWN R.A.ILR.OAD STATION LANDING ROA OQ. PA1H JN 0 L 3 wi11•11 J i- R,AIL.R.OA.P p 1 Z D e I hl, f F,A5E9 ON MAD g`f LYo1•15 (1519). Figure 18.Map of the North Kohala District in the Later 19th Century from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:41) HAUN a ASSOCIATES I 22 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Christensen's land in Puakea and Kukuipahu were purchased by Dr. James Wight around 1875 and subsequently established a sugarcane and ranching operation on the property. Dr.Wight settled in Kohala in late 1840s after a ship he was traveling on wrecked off the coast of Mahukona. He operated a drug store in the area and also served as a Circuit Judge between 1852 and 1863. He was later was elected to the House of Representatives and subsequently to the House of Nobles under the Hawaiian Monarchy (Clark et al. 2013:31). Dr. Wight obtained a substantial interest in the Kohala Sugar Plantation and established another plantation in Halawa. He constructed an animal-powered sugar mill at Puakea According to an article in The Pacific Commercial Advertiser (precursor to the Honolulu Advertiser) a total of 1,118 tons of sugarcane were produced at Puakea in 1919 with an estimated 1,050 tons to be produced in 1920(Figure 19). IP THE PACIFIC COMMERCIAL AD° 7"7 ,-;.›...„,„ trzin ar d Shipments To First of Month, 39,493 Tons hirm.-nts of 1820 Hawaiian soon.Mahnkrota.February 4,for:San Francis to F..hronre 1 totaled 34.1003 roar,as.et,took It.following Orn: shipment., e..ml'nm.F with 01.033 tone *hippo.' to Fontes, 100 toga to Wea'ern: trate.rrlouare 1,tow The following tsim.1 hilt.4001, Hawi.9402,the two Lar be'tattoo will show the ehipmenia for barb,Ing to Crockett. The Annie/oho/wale year classified: 1 e,..r t.r'tate0l 1ASO toss. i 1920 1938 Th.11a'ton atr.mor t:acllcm..mitiag. Sugar Factors. .. ... 33,730 500.MP February 7,took 831 tons for Crockett Wearers . h obO 4.006 The Msi•nnia took.14241 hole to Crockett leaned 1,A73 7.40tl marl 5.30 tons of refined, loadings In Rear ratter, Total .. , 39,15'3 61053 Rteamera to sail n the orar fittest 1 Shipments slate February 1 boo,. will hurl at porta anti take shipments,Ices: Western Surma,2.143:Factors'. a6p!oPimstely ai toupee,le,337: refined,530.—a grand to'al ter Marietta Port Ales. 400 boos boldateof52Jm7hone,of which 2403 tans I Wireless:Manes.H no'a'u and Kaha'n' is refined, about 4000 took; elrrro.n. Hanoltdn i MA's rirat ibb0mant and Mobukona,53t*t'oa.Kat Woatern; Arrest mill,bare shipped their brat ?Meriden, Kah,soi, 3260, all Wos'era.t align,since the tart report a week ago. The Per of the Maui's cargo ie utters. Meanem il, IMt.sent 113 ton.by the Matssn eta . Pr 3ta'•aots,whisk will,'from 1tenbin- The following tad,skarn*bitomestsInWcdorsdas:Gnomes shipped its ant t,. February 1 by'plantations Macias, lot by the Matson*1200 tans;tot tbo Angst 1/111 iotadra ironokge; la.e in. .3latro. schooner Annie Johnson, from eludes Koolau Agricultural,., blot,mrntt 76',.b'•tlmat«. t,. W..1 Lata«('rnpHAWAII titan t " , 01,4,.1,4, .,,,.„,,,,,,,, ,,, 2,,,,..0............... 2,,,,..0 . aZUl'Soon )1?IlaCa.,,ams _...tin t Hilo Sonarber Co. .1240, ........ 1443$ Unwell Otto 1'.,, told. ......... ena ....765 Wow*10.00.?/'a. t4iin Pet.+kY,wear 1.o.. SSWan It9.I ........ WONTh(lj !ansa!Co. 4.0 ... 411.4 Hnknmw t'bwnitra Co. MAW' as 34064 ISMrahn>aw 114..0.... . 12.1011 M; K_S 040.40$`lna/tyar t'w._ tad. ............... 009® axtttt H.wakna NIM[t',Seem It ski 900.4.,,bane PHwtatiw tMa AI ton 4, He0Wa Samar Cot.................. HAMS ........ 13,541ITarlacIatta, Milt )..........s..,... sant Milt and PWmtion 1:din . .,.,,. 3.Pail Mama Plantation . S01a! .. 7IS( Kobel Unser Co.out .... X:. Paton ton co. . Ain 2213. pato Min and malale0.. n:R: toll it'o.a«a Pharaon. . I.MEt I.ten Koen lase 1 Co.,1.14, aa ... . ^.,2140 Hnteitania N*gar 14mnee..Co.. 0,n. .....0,_S Ilawaibo EPtnnanml Co.......... 1K0m.a.' 1021x1Total . 1'.6.00.'sats 8r:x11 Figure 19.February 13,1920 article from The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(from newspapers.com) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 123 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 According to Henke's A Survey of Livestock in Hawaii, the history of the ranch is described below: Dr.James Wight acquired the Puakea Ranch lands about 1875 and continued with the sheep ranch,the sheep at that time numbering about 7000 head of the Merino breed. Robert Mason acted as manager from about 1875 to 1882 and was followed by Hans Martinsen,who continued till 1886,when J. H. MacKenzie became manager for Dr. Wight and continued to 1901. Dr. Wight about 1886 imported two Maltese jacks at a cost of $1400 and he was probably one of the first men to breed mules in Hawaii. Since the sheep suffered from scab, and wild dogs killed many, cattle were substituted for the sheep in the eighties and there were few or no sheep left after 1890. Two Shorthorn bulls were imported from California and bred to the native cattle and Shorthorn blood predominated on Puakea Ranch till 1901, although some Hereford blood was introduced as early as 1889. Beef had little value at this time and many cattle were sold as work oxen for the cane fields. While Mr. MacKenzie was manager water was brought eight miles from the Kohala mountains, some wells were dug near the beach and some fences built. When Arthur Mason became manager in 1901 the ranch had about 3000 cattle. During the next twenty years Hereford blood gradually replaced the Shorthorns. Eighteen Herefords, eight bulls and ten cows were imported from Oregon in 1908 at a cost of$130 each and five bulls were imported from Kentucky in 1920 at a cost of$500 each. (Henke 1929:41- 42) Following the death of Dr. Wight on September 2, 1905 at the age of 91. The ranch was operated by Robert Shingle, E. H.Wodehouse, and A.W.T. Bottomley,trustees for the James Wight Estate. According to Adams and Athens(1994:18) by 1910,8,758 acres of land were under the control of the Puakea Ranch. Water to the ranch and sugar mill were supplied by the Kohala Ditch, which supplied several plantations in the area emptying into a reservoir in Puakea. The supply of water was inadequate for the successful cultivation of sugarcane and the last cane crop was harvested in 1930. (Clark et al.2013:31). According to Henke,the Puakea Ranch also included an area formerly known as Puuhue Ranch (1929:40). The headquarters of the Puuhue Ranch operated as a separate ranch previous to about 1906 when an amalgamation with Puakea Ranch was effected which will expire in 1930..."(1929:40). The characteristics of the combined ranches are described as follows: These combined ranches run from the sea to an elevation of about 4000 feet and have a total area of about 25,000 acres and at present have about 5000 Herefords, 350 light horses and 10 Berkshire sows. Good Hereford bulls as well as females have been imported from time to time and the ranches at present have 85 range bulls and 75 selected females that are bred to specially good bulls for the production of the range bulls.The range bulls are segregated from the cattle from July to February. The rainfall at the Puakea Ranch headquarters has varied between 30 and 63 inches since 1920.The water needed for the cattle comes from the Kohala mountains. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 124 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Paspalum dilatatum has been planted quite extensively and has done very well. Koa haole(Leucaena glauca)is being experimented with as a promising low land forage crop. Pigeon peas (Cajanus indicus) have not been extensively tried, although results of such attempts as have been made with this legume have not been too encouraging. Plenty of Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) and some red top (Tricholaena rosea) is found on the lower and intermediate elevations and Hilo grass (Paspalum conjugatum) is quite abundant on the upper lands. A scattering of Ohia lehua trees is found over the upper section with practically all their branches on the leeward side of the tree, which is indicative of the strong winds that prevail much of the time. The ranches are in need of more fences and paddocks to facilitate segregation and control of the animals at different ages and to give newly planted grasses an opportunity to get started while the cattle are kept out of certain sections for a time. These paddocks are included in the plans for the development of the ranches. Cattle are marketed from two years of age to about five, at which time they weigh about 450 to 650 pounds dressed weight. About 500 to 600 are shipped to Honolulu annually,with an additional 180 slaughtered on the ranch for consumption in the Kohala district.Cattle for Honolulu are loaded at Kawaihae.The Mahukona beach is not suitable for loading cattle on the Inter-Island boats. It is planned to reduce the number of horses which are kept for sale to various parties. No mules are produced on the ranch at the present time. (Henke 1929:41) As many landowners did, Dr. Wight brought in laborers to work the land, contributing to a wave of 185,000 Japanese immigrants who came to Hawaii in the 19`h and 20th Centuries https://keolamagazine.com). Zenjiro Kawamoto and his wife Wasa Watabayashi immigrated to North Kohala from Hiroshima as part of the wave of Japanese immigration. They settled at the Puakea Ranch and moved into what would eventually be call the"Cowboy House" (see Figure 4).The Kawamotos raised three children at the ranch,consisting of Masato(Johnny),Yoshio(Yoshi)and Thelma and the family went on to oversee the operations of the Puakea Ranch for four generations. The Parker Ranch began leasing the Puakea Ranch lands from the James Wight Estate in 1932, agreeing to a twenty year lease agreement for a fee of$2,500 per year.The lease of the ranch land is memorialized in a February 9, 1932 article in the Honolulu Advertiser(Figure 20). The Parker Ranch eventually purchased the Puakea Ranch lands outright in 1944 and eventually purchased the land in 1944 https://puakearanch.com). Figure 21 is a portion of the USGS 1930 Hawi quadrangle showing the location of the project area and the Puakea Ranch headquarters. The headquarters are situated on the mauka side of the historic road that follows the path of the current Akoni Pule Highway. The map also shows a road extending seaward to Honoipu Landing and the railroad extending throughout Puakea Ahupua'a at approximately 170 to 200 ft elevation. A cluster of building is located inland of Honoipu Landing and three houses are present mauka of the railroad line. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 125 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 difirksea AMU=y. PARKER RANCH BUYS KOHALA CO. LAND AND STOCK The Kotula Ranch Co. on Hawaii bee been purchased by the Parseabet,owned by 17-year old Richard ps0ait.in a 0300,000 deal,it was an- nounced Monday, A 20-year leasehold of the Puakea ranch at an annual rental of$2,200YIncludedtothetransaction. The Parker ranch is enlarged byapproximately17.000 acres as • re. e010 of the purlhate.and 9.000 bead ar cattle. The Puakea ranch contains about6:000 acres and 4.200 head of cat- tle and the 831h11a Ranch 12000 acs and 4.500 head of etock. Alfred W. Carter la trustee and want manager of the Parker ranch which operates in Honolulu throughtheHawaiiMeatCo At one time the/Cabals and Put- tee ranches were under an amelga. matmn agreement. the trustees of the Wight estate then being E, R. edehouar. A. W. T. Bottomley andHobertW. Shingle. The trusteeehlp expired about a year ago and at that time the Wight estate lands went to the beneficiaries. In the latter part of 1931 the 30-yearleeaeholdofthePuakearanchprop. erty to the Eonsla ranch was ex-rated. Rohela Ranch Co.wad incorporatedonMarch14. 1904. At the thole of the execution oftheWamboldthe/Cohala Ranch Co. purchased the rights of the WightMirarnthePusknranchrattle. paying 00360. Figure 20.February 9,2932 articles from The Honolulu Advertiser(from newspapers.com) Figure 22 is a portion of an aerial view of the project area vicinity taken on December 20, 1976 by the U.S. Geological Survey and obtained from the University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library http://magis.manoa.hawaii.edu).This photograph shows the extent of the Puakea Ranch headquarters at this time. In the 1980s the Parker Ranch subsequently sold 200 acres of the Puakea Ranch lands to a real estate developer and the Kawamoto family and other ranch employees were asked to relocate. The Puakea Ranch headquarters, including the present project area subsequently fell into disrepair. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 26 TMK: (3) 5-„,-...._1: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 IF \ '''' wwilir''. • i ' sit'e: ',,, i,...,*,rx.--#::!.;ti .: , • i ''\.., -LT '40-4=4":,--/: rwit., ,,,i,,,,,, -.) - i (,- ,•. 15/.._,,,N, • ..,„.„..„•\,.,--- ' 04,,,,,. ji k s\,:,' tish e. i, ,,,:, 41,,,a.„„11,4p:„..,..,,:„...iitii ,,, ,,A. „,.,„,-.4, - , :s,...,.. ,,,,,„,, , ,,,,, 00 .-,:.\\,,,,, .: , lip I. . ,..,, .10 ___. r..,Ait.(: . m11 A' i4. . ,,...,. .,.., . • s.,..,,,,,... . . ,: ii,. 4- Lie„.• ,,,..::,.....,,:::: ii.....„,;;JA 10 77-..„ 4 t if,. b... . r .74-•.•Nicor—,..,,, I toso t 0.........„.„..„,„..,, . , to 4 asyftr. •ttr No,,,%,:tt.--;„,4"•*.t 144',/%„:„.,-.4...c., .:,,,,,1:4400. •-,,., ffi{ iftt y rtN I' .1 •'.,:),, '`.'.4,-",-/-......”{ Q.,.. c A, ;\ . ),„.„,,,,.."..,/,,,"...,.., A„,,,,;,„,..... .. \---,—:---. . .--.,----- f--.._,T- s:\,i:, 4- 7,;,,; k' t1: 11‘ 1:''''.: 4:::::- 5,;; ti:'''''.:,,t''':rtt-r---*,:t. ' -":1,,,: t:t14, . -....,1r.,,,,,.—I/4''.- 7.171"1,..%1'1"kk,111,,.. .„:,,,,.\:tir***/**. '''' sig-- ' ll'ort- 8\' oo4,V4:„llf4,,.,,,„,,. 1,, i, 7,,l, i.;„,-,'''',\k::,i.:; 2-1'-1\.,'.\ i..'..,( 11..., 101 Lr• : k--- li,"' 7'.,-'-,.-..-, i'.\,1Ni/lk,. Iu:7.r.l.k;/,1'- N.:* f"iw,' 0", l--",-, 1,- 4.,„,'--„,,,.,, Y._ t',,%,',:,,:,'-,„,\,,,.. i,„„\,..:, A.:.:„,:.„ t-:*' 1:,-,,,.--.,,,, 7. s,:0-:.,:v: aii:i,-. 4i:, ir:,.t..-.. 1W'.',,.410„. 0.„--0I0''1.V" 11-0._.-.,,,,t.:_•—: N_ j,.„:.,..".:... a-.'- 7 fi,„'..„'',„''V.':'-''.'„„\- 7,'*";,,.. 4,:,*`,., N,-'',.,;.,',,'. t'',..':,'',,"'.''*,,-, \',''',',''1'''-,'','''''.':'.'.1:,.'„„C''\. 1,':: t.'',:* t.:',':'-4'.-' S":\.-,. s.„ '„.'-,„",',: w I _ `' ' ,._.” 1.k I, e1,..,.: I;:;:, ,, a” Y, 4" j ` -^.,. -req ..*. 7„,..::t.„'''''''",,,K `a,w d. t'. per. ni 4 1:7;,,,,,, , t.,,.‘ i3/4, 1 ..,;:„ ;_...„..,_ . „. 1 4:'; s; tlitio---4- „... f m z,:.,;....__-\..,'i',4t,,., s..;%:::';, I, sa;.:,„‘N.,„\Ntoifoo\: ,:::\;.\\,„\:,..„_,,,,,;-:„„,„1-::::-\.,:,..\;)-' . 1\'''''',„,„,,,,,,,...,;:,_. 4;.._....,___ _7' e-- 7------ _,;;:______, :;-'''''''---: m--„,,-,- s.„.\\''''':'\\" 1;',. 441 E 7'-'''' --:;,..;;;;7-1-:';:-\'' i;:> mit 4 ra c., m 0 VI 4 w 8' t 0. N N Ol N 3 E pp LL LL HAUN &ASSOCIATES 127 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Previous Archaeological Research A considerable amount of archaeological research has been conducted within Puakea Ahupua'a, including the entirety of the portion of the ahupua'a seaward of the Akoni Pule Highway. These projects, totaling more than 750 acre are shown in Figure 23 and summarized in Table 2. Not included in the figure or table are Statewide Survey of Historic Places survey that extended along the west coast of Hawaii Island and the historical overview of the North Kohala district by Tomonari-Tuggle (1988).The sites identified during these projects were subsequently documented during surveys by Bury et al. (2006), Clark et al. (2013), Rosendahl (1982a, 1982b)and are included in those entries. The prior archaeological studies in the area indicate widespread disturbance associated with historic cattle ranching. Despite this disturbance, 60 sites have been documented. This equates to an estimated density of 13 sites per acre. Between 1982 and 1993 a series of field inspections, reconnaissance surveys and excavation projects were conducted of a 440 acre parcel that extends from the shoreline at Honoipu Landing inland to the Akoni Pule Highway.These projects were conducted by Barrera (1984, 1992, 1993)and Rosendahl (1982a, 1982b, 1984). These combined projects identified a total of 22 sites comprised predominately of pre- contact to early historic habitation sites, along several agricultural and burial sites. A portion of the historic railroad grade that extends through the area was also documented. Clark and Rechtman (2005) conducted an archaeological inventory survey pf a 215 acre parcel in Puakea and Kukuipahu Ahupua'a.This survey area extended inland from the Bury et al. (2006)/Clark et al. (2013) project area east to the Akoni Pule Highway. Large portions of the area had been mechanically cleared for pasture improvement; however, 13 sites were documented. The sites consisted of a platform, two habitation complexes, a habitation/resource procurement area, a modified outcrop/wind break, a complex comprised of a water tank, a concrete water trough, and two foundations, a concrete survey marker,a cairn and five modified outcrops/alignments Bury et al. (2006) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of a 78.5 acre parcel in coastal Puakea, extending from the shoreline at Holana Bay inland to approximately 200 ft. Portions of this area were subsequently examined by Clark et al. (2013). A total of 25 sites have been identified in this area consisting of two survey markers, a portion of the railroad grade that extends through the area, World War II Navy tower installation, eight pre-contact to early historic habitation complexes, three habitation enclosures and two enclosure remnants,two burial platforms,two alignments,a mound and three cairns. The area immediately to the south of the present by Corbin and Rosendahl (2006). The area was comprised of former Puakea Ranch pasture land that had been previously grubbed. No archaeological sites or features were identified during this project. Based on the archaeological work conducted in the area,the majority of the habitation sites in Puakea are located in the coastal areas.The interior portions,including the present project area are located along the northern fringes of the vast agricultural complex known as the Kohala Field System as defined by Tomonari-Tuggle(1988;see Figure 16). HAUN &ASSOCIATES 1 28 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 iip.,Upolu Airport ab fi m\\ f \ -y V' \ Z \ Limukoko Point / m \ \ v t/ \ \N Umiwai Bay ' N N fi , \ N A N. Upolu Airport Road-.\-- I m 1N\ N. I, \N. N N.t \ V \ N N N 7 \ N.A y 1/4 N N. N N.N. GGF.. G \ N N. -7Q2 FQ\t Honoipu Landing to N\7 \ Puakea Point AO A\ Barrera(1984 1992,1993)A c__ , Holana Bay 7 Rosendahi(1982a 182) 1984) Akoni Pule Hwy Hwy 270) 1 Hianaula Point Bury et al (2006) ._ Clark et al (2013) - N 1 j i MK:(3)5-6-001:082 \ QN. Y Oi 800ClarkandRechtman(2005) _ 0,1,0 N 1- N .A O, 4N F \ A , /, Special use A A ' \ permit area A Corbin and Rosendah(2006) \N 9kF1 N N. N N : )7 KUKU)PAHU N N N f` \ Kohala Ditch rn S Akoni Pule Ftwy Hwy 270) I 600 i AWALUA tr ——_ 400 Contour Interval=200fl o 30000 Ahupua'a Boundary Ditch 200 0 1000In Figure 23.Previous archaeological work HAUN &ASSOCIATES 129 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Table 2.Previous archaeological work in Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas Author Ahupua'a Study Type* Elevation(ft Acreage No of Historic use AMSL) sites Bury et al.(2006),Clark et al. Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeologicallnventory 0-200 78.4 25 Cattle ranching 2013) Survey Barrera(1984,1922,1993), Field inspection, Rosendhal(1982a,1982b,1984) Puakea and Honoipu Reconnaissance, 0-550 440.0 22 Cattle ranching Excavation Clark and Rechtman(2005) Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeologicallnventory 200-500 215.0 13 Cattle ranchingSurvey Corbin and Rosendahl(2006) Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeologicallnventory 450-550 24.6 0 Cattle ranchingSurvey 17..t1,;:777;k71.iii715;Z::445;aigilair"q4aktilaZZIZZLZIIigiairli "!'':''4911"74 Previous Ethnographic Research The current landowner, Ms. Christie Cash, has conducted extensive research into the Puakea Ranch and the people who called it home. In an October 24, 2017 letter to the architecture branch of the SHPD requesting permission to reconstruct several structures on the property, Ms. Cash provides insight into the Kawamoto family who oversaw the operations of the Puakea Ranch for generations, and a general historic of the ranch.According to Ms.Cash: Because these structures no longer exist and only foundations or ruins remain,we must rely on the oral history of Masa and Thelma Kawamoto who lived at Puakea and were both born at Puakea in the Cowboy House in the 1920's. As children, their mother worked for the family in the "big house" and Masa described it as a large two-story home with many bedrooms. According to Masa, many big parties and gatherings were held and his mother worked the parties as kitchen help. Masa and Yoshi would hunt pheasants for the parties and his mother would prepare them. He described this to me when he came to visit Puakea and teach me the history he could. From 1870-1928, descendants and relatives of James Wight of Kohala resided in the home and managed Puakea Planation and Ranch. The home was considered to be a grand estate and many parties and gatherings were hosted at the home, as "The Society"was a very important part of the predominantly British culture of North Kohala Sugar's growers and Mill owners. Prominent Plantation Families of the time including Mrs. & Mrs. H. R. Bryant, Mr. & Mrs.James S.Wight, Mr. Robert Leighton Hind and Mr. Mrs. H.P.Woods were all residences of the estate home from 1870-1940. Beginning in 1928-1932, management of Puakea was controlled Mr.John Hind,who was the president of the Puakea Plantation Company. Beginning in the 1930s, Parker Ranch also took a greater interest and control of Puakea. In 1944, Richard Smart purchased Puakea Ranch from the James Wight Estate where it had been part of the vast Wight Estate holdings beginning in the 1850s. HAUN a ASSOCIATES I 30 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 FINDINGS Public notices were published in the August 24 and 26 2018 issues of West Hawaii Today newspaper and in the September 2018 edition of the Office of Hawaiian Affairs (OHA) newsletter, Ka Wai Ola, searching for people that were knowledgeable of the project area and its vicinity (Appendix A). No one responded to the public notices. OHA and members of the North Kohala community were contacted in an effort to identify persons with an intimate knowledge of the project area and Puakea Ahupua'a. Ms. Cash recommended that we speak Masa Kawamoto (a former resident of the ranch). David Gomes (a local historian) and Michael Gomes (a local historian). Shane Palacat-Nelson of OHA recommended that we contact Fredrico Cachola(a prominent member and cultural practitioner of North Kohala). Masatsu "Masa" Kawamoto was born on the premises of Puakea Ranch in the Cowboy house in 1922 Figure 24). Unfortunately, Masa is 96 years old and does not remember much of his childhood time at Puakea Ranch. Masa was a Parker Ranch foreman, a rodeo champion, and a member of the 100th Battalion/442nd Infantry Regiment during World War II. In November of 2011, Masa Kawamoto was awarded the Congressional Gold Medal for his service during World War II as part of the 100th Battalion/442nd Infantry Regiment. His wife, Eunice, brought him to the ranch for an interview on October 30, 2018. She said that whenever she drives him by the ranch he would point out that he used to ride horses there. When asked if he could recall any traditional practices on the ranch he was unresponsive. Eunice, though, recalled that before the land in the area was sold off the families would farm and grow their own produce; people would hunt birds as well but none of that has happened in the area since all of the families moved out. Eunice also mentioned that while Masa may not remember much he did have a chance to speak with Ms. Cash a few years ago and was able to pass his story along to her then. Christie did share that Masa was born and spent his early years at Puakea Ranch. Masa and his brother Yoshi would help their mother when she would work up at the"big house." 7' d fi f s5r Figure 24.Masatsu Kawamoto at Puakea in the home he was born in(courtesy of Christie Cash, taken 30 Oct 2018) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 131 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 David Gomes is a local historian and luthier currently residing in Hawi. He was happy to have the chance to speak about Puakea Ranch and Ahupua'a but said that his brother, Michael Gomes,was a better source of information. Michael Gomes is a lifelong resident of Kohala and a local historian. He co-authored the book Kohala Aina a History of North Kohala with Sophia V. Schweitzer. Mr. Gomes was interviewed via phone on December 6, 2018. Mr. Gomes discussed Puakea Ranch during the tenure of James Wight and his family as owners and then being eventually sold off to Parker Ranch in the mid-1940s. Dr.James Wight owned land that stretched from Halawa to Mahukona. Dr. Wight built the first animal-powered sugar mill in Kohala to process the sugar from his sugar plantation. Mr. Gomes stated that sugar did not grow well at Puakea Ranch even though Wight used the area to process the sugar from the leeward side of Kohala. Pineapple did grow well in leeward Kohala and was cultivated in the vicinity of Puakea Ranch. When asked he was aware of any traditional cultural practices or places within Puakea Ranch or its vicinity Mr. Gomes stated that the only activities that he could think of were associated with ranching since the Puakea Ranch area has been ranch land for the past 70 years. Fedrico Keakaokalani Cachola, Jr. was born and raised in Kohala and has spent his life devoted to enriching the lives of Hawai'i's youth. He was a teacher at Wai'anae Intermediate, vice principal at Nanakuli High School and principal of Nanaikapono Elementary on O'ahu. He is a cultural practitioner and well respected for his knowledge of Kohala. He was contacted via email in October regarding this project. He was willing to share his mana'o (thoughts) on the project and requested more information on the scope of this CIA. Mr. Cachola did not respond to further contact after further project details were provided. No traditional properties or ongoing practices were identified during this CIA. Parker Ranch leased the property in the 1920's and bought it in the mid-1940s. The local families that lived and worked on the ranch would farm to raise their own produce or hunt birds in the area. These activities have not taken place since the ranch families moved away once Parker Ranch sold its holdings in Puakea. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 132 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 CONCLUSION The objective of this CIA is to identify any culturally significant resources or traditional cultural practices that occurred within the project area and its immediate vicinity. The CIA was conducted following the framework set forth by the Hawai'i Supreme Court in the case of Ka Pa'akai 0 Ka 'Aina vs. the Hawai'i State Land Use Commission(LUC). This CIA was prepared in conjunction with a Special Use Permit application for the County of Hawai'i Planning and Building Departments. The landowner proposes to operate the 14.92 acres special use permit area of Puakea Ranch as a"Guest Ranch." An archaeological inventory survey(AIS) of a 2.14 acre portion of the property was conducted in October 2018 and identified three historic features of a previously identified site (Site 9071) within the project area,two historic concrete slabs and a ranch wall (Haun and Henry 2018). The portion of Site 9071 within the project area has retained its integrity. It was assessed as significant for its associations with sugar cane cultivation and cattle ranching which are activities that contributed to the broad patterns of history(NRHP Criterion A). Site 9071 is also associated with Dr.James White(NRHP Criterion B),is an excellent site type example (NRHP Criterion C) and has the potential to yield information which may broaden our understanding of the local history(NRHP Criterion D). Previous ethnographic research showed that sugar and ranching were the prominent economic activities for this area. The early 20th Century showed a shift from sugar cultivation to ranching at Puakea Ranch. There was not enough water to make sugar cane cultivation lucrative. Parker Ranch began leasing Puakea Ranch and its surrounding lands in the 1920s and bought the lands in the mid-1940s. Masa Kawamoto, born and raised at Puakea Ranch, a cowboy and World War II veteran, and his wife, Eunice, once recalled farming and bird hunting activities taking place in and around Puakea Ranch. Michael Gomes, a local historian and author, noted that the only activities he could recall for Puakea Ranch were all associated with ranching. Once Parker Ranch sold its Puakea holdings the families that lived on and around the ranch were asked to leave and those activities no longer take place at Puakea Ranch. No traditional cultural properties or practices were identified within the project area during this study. Traditional cultural practices and properties may be present in Puakea Ahupua'a, but the proposed use of the ranch should not interfere or have a negative impact upon them. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 133 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 REFERENCES Archives Division of the Hawai'i Department of Accounting and General Services. 2017 http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search Beamer, Kamanamaikalani 2014 No Makou Ka Mana Liberating a Nation. Kamehameha Publishing 2014, Honolulu, HI. Best,G.M. 1978 Railroads of Hawaii: Narrow and Standard Gauge Common Carriers. San Marino, CA. Golden West Books.CA:Golden West Books. Bushnell,O.A. 1993 The Gifts of Civilization: Germs and Genocide in Hawai'i. University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu. Chinen,J. 1958 The Great Mahele:Hawaii's Land Division of1848. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Conde,J. 1971 Narrow Gauge in a Kingdom.Glenwood Publishers, Felton,California. Coulter,J. 1971 Agricultural Land-Use Planning in the Territory of Hawaii 1940. Agricultural Extension Bulletin No.36 Honolulu. DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources) 2003 Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Subtitle 13,State Historic Preservation Division Rules. Day,A.G. 1992 Hawaii and Points South: True Island Tales. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. Dye,T. 2017 Archaeological Reconnaissance for a portion of a Proposed Heritage Sugarcane Plantation, Land of Kealahewa, North Kohala, Hawai`i Island,TMK: (3) 5-5-006:010.T.S. Dye&Colleagues report prepared for Company Rum LLC. Ellis,W. 1963 A Narrative of a Tour through Hawaii. Originally published in 1917. Honolulu Advertiser Publishing Co., Honolulu. 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. HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 34 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 FT n.d. Foreign Testimony Recorded by the Board of Commissioners to Quiet Land Titles in the Hawaiian Islands. Manuscript. Hawai'i State Archives. 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 Hawai'i. Bull. Amer. Meteor. Soc. 94, 313-316, doi: 10.1175/BAMS-D- 11-00228.1. 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. Kuykendall, R.and Day,A.G. 1976 Hawaii:A History from Polynesian Kingdom to American State. Prentice-Hall, Englewood. 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. Oliver D. 1961 The Pacific Islands. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Pukui, M.K.,S.H. Elbert, E.T. Mookini 1976 Place Names of Hawaii,Revised and Expanded Edition. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Rechtman, R.and M.Orr 1998 Archaeological Inventory Survey for the Upolu Airport Master Plan, and Environmental Study, Lands of Kealahewa 1, 2 and 3 and Opihipau, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i. PHRI report 1764 prepared for Belt Collins Hawaii. Sato, H.H.,W. Ikeda, R. Paeth, R.Smythe,and M.Takehiro,Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii,State ofHawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture,Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station.Washington, D.C.:Government Printing Office. Schmitt, R. 1977 Historical Statistics of Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Schweitzer,S. 2003 Kohala Aina A History ofNorth Kohala. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 35 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Stephenson, L.K. 1977 Kohala Keia(This is Kohala)Collected Expressions of a Community,A Product of Kohala People. Privately published. The Hawaiian University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library 2018 http://magis.manoa.hawaii.edu Tomonari-Tuggle, M.J. 1988 North Kohala:Perceptions of a Changing Community.A Cultural Resource Management Study. Prepared for Hawaii State Department of Land and Natural Resources—Division of State parks,Outdoor Recreation and Historic Sites. Ulukau: The Hawaiian Electronic Dictionary, A Dictionary of the Hawaiian Language (revised by Henry H. Parker). 2018 http://ulukau.org U.S.Climate Data website 2018 http://www.usclimatedata.com) Waihona'Aina Corporation 2000 The Mahele Database,waihona.com. Wehewehe.org 2016 Hawaii Electronic Library -Na Puke Wehewehe 'Olelo Hawai'i Wolfe, E.,and J. Morris 2001 Geological Map of the Island of Hawaii. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S Geological Survey. FAUN &ASSOCIATES 1 36 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 APPENDIX A: LAND COMMISSION AWARDS IN PUAKEA AHUPUA'A (FROM WAIHONA `AINA) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 137 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Claim Number: 08746 Claimant: Keawe Other claimant: Other name: Island: Hawaii District: Kohala,North Ahupuaa: Puakeaiki,Puakeanui Puuoneo,Puulaula,Kalipahale,Paehala,Hallipalala,Laleakone Apana: 7 Awarded: 0 Loi: FR: Plus: NR: 34v8 Mala Taro: FT: 77v4 Kula: NT: 121v4 House lot:1 RP: Kihapai/Pakanu:6 Number of Royal Patents: Salt lands: Koele/Poalima: No Wauke: Loko: No Olona: Lokoia: No Noni: Fishing Rights: No Hala: Sea/Shore/Dunes:No Sweet Potatoes:Auwai/Ditch: No Irish Potatoes: Other Edifice: No Bananas:Spring/Well: No Breadfruit: Pigpen: No Coconut: Road/Path:Yes Coffee: Burial/Graveyard: No Oranges:Wall/Fence:No Bitter Melon/Gourd: Stream/Muliwai/River. No Sugar Cane: Pali:No Tobacco:Disease: No HAUN &ASSOCIATES 1 38 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 KoalKou Trees: Claimant Died: No Other Plants: Other Trees: Other Mammals:No Miscellaneous: 3 No_8746,Keawe,January 14,1848 N.R.34v8 Puakea is the Ahupua'a claim.It was from Keohokalole to Kekuanui,from Kekuanui to me,Keawe./l have held it!for fifteen years,that is my claim for land. KEAWE F.T.77v4 No.8746,Keawe Kaahue sworn,testifies that claimant occupies one piece of land in Ili of Puuoneo,Ahupuaa Puakeaiki. thus bounded: South by waste land West try waste land North by public highway East by Ili of Puulaula. Also one lot in Ili of Puulaula,Ahupuaa aforesaid. South by land held by Kailiahi West by waste land North by waste land&public highway East by Ahupuaa Honoipu. Also one piece in Ili of Kalepahale,same Ahupuaa. South by land held by Kauiho West by land held by Kailiahi North&East by waste land. Also one piece in Iii of Paehala,same Ahupuaa. South by land held by Keawekipi West by land held by Paahao North&East by waste land. Also one lot in Hi of Haliipalala,same Ahupuaa. South by land held by Keawekipi West by land held by Kupihi North&East by waste land. Also lot no.2 in Ili of Puuoneo,bounded: South,West,North,East by waste land. All the above-descried lots consist of dry land,partly cultivated,unfenced&no houses on premises. Also one lot consist ofone equal half ofan enclosure belonging to claimant.Keohokalole,situated in Ili of Laleakone,Ahupuaa Puakeanui.Said enclosure is surrounded by public,i.e.made land belonging to Keohokalole. Kehuanui(konohiki)gave the above lands to claimant A.D. 1833. Kalamailalo,sworn,affirms as above. N.T.121-122v4 No.8746,Keawe,October 4,1848 Kaaua,sworn and stated,I have seen in the ili land of Puakeaiki ahupuaa,6 sections. 1.Section I-Puuoneo Ili. Mauka by idle land Kohalawaho by idle land HAUN &ASSOCIATES 139 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Makai by street Hamakua by Puulaula Ili. It has been cultivated;there is no house. 2. Section II-Puulaula Ili. Mauka bt Kailiahi's land Kohalawaho by idle land Makai by a street and idle land Hamakua by Honoipu ahupuaa. Cultivation has been done;there is no house. 3.Section III-Kalipahale Ili. Mauka by Kauiho's land Kohalawaho by Kailiahi's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. This has been cultivated;no house. 4.Section IV-Paehala Ili. Mauka by Keawekipi's land Kohalawaho by Paahao's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. Cultivated has been done; no house. 5. Section V-Haliipalala Ili. Mauka by Keawekipi's land Kohalawaho by Kupihi's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. A portion of it has been cultivated;no house. 6. Section VI-Puuoneo Ili land. Mauka by idle land The rest of the boundaries are Idle land Some of it have been cultivated. 7.Section VII-Ili land in Laleakone ahupuaa named Puakeanui_ Mauka and the rest of the boundaries are Keohokalole's land.Two houses are there, one ofwhich is for Keawe, one for Kaaua and another house is tor Keohokalole in his/KeaweW claim Kekuanui had given him his interest in 1833; no one has objected. Kalamailalo,sworn and stated. I have known[I eft blank][as]Kaaua has related here. No.8746 not awarded] HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 40 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Claim Number: 08879B Claimant:Kamalamailalo Other claimant: Kaulemamoku,father Other name: Island: Hawaii District Kohala,North Ahupuaa:Puakea Ili. Kaavvikiwiki,PUUmani,Lolekoac.Maliu Apana:4 Awarded: 1 Lui: FR: Plus: NR: Male Taro:FT: Kula: NT: 118v4 House lot: 1 RP: Kihapai/Pakanu: 4 Number of Royal Patents: Salt lands: Koele/Poalirna: No Wauke: Loko: No Olona: Lokoia: No Noni: Fishing Rights: No I lata: Sea/Shore/Dunes: No Sweet Potatoes: Auwai/Ditch. No Irish Potatoes: Other Edifice:No Bananas: Spring/Well No Breadfruit: Pigpen: No Coconut: Road/Path: No Coffee: BuriallGraveyard: No Oranges: Wall'Fence: No Bitter Melon/Gourd: Siream/MuliwaltRiver.No Sugar Cane: Pali.No Tobacco: Disease: No Koa/Kou Trees Claimant Died: No Other Plants: Other Trees Other Mammals: No Miscellaneois: Awarded 1 apana,also 102B dead claim,5 houses No.88798,Kamalamailalo F.T.107v4 Kaaua,sworn,testifies that claimant occupies six lots of land in the Ahupuaa of Puakea,thus situated& bounded 1st lot-in Ili of Kaaikiwiki. South by land held by Moku West by land held by Makuahine North by land held by Kikau East by land held by Keaulumoku. 2d lot in Ili of Puumanu. South by land held by Kaaloa West&East by land held by Keauluoku North by land held by Moku. 3d lot in Ili of Lelekoae(no.1) South by land held by Moku West by land held by Kikau North by land held by Keeweopala East by land held by Makuahine. 4th lot in Ili of Maliu. South East by land held by Moku West by land held by Kanoena North by land held by Kaloa. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 141 TMK: (3)5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 5th lot in Ili of Lelekoae(No.2) South by land held by Makaokaia West by land held by Makuahine North by land held by Moku East by land held by Kamikana. Said lots are dry land,cultivated in part,unfenced. 6th lot In III Lelekoae(No.3)occupied as a house lot.It is fenced with wall.Five houses stand upon the premises,belonging to claimant&family. title extends back to reign of Kamehameha I through parents of claimant.Uncontested. Moku,sworn,testifies as above. N.T. 118-120v4 No.8879B,Kamalamailalo,October 5,1 848 No.102B,(Dead claim) Kaaua,sworn,and stated:I have seen there are in the Puakea ahupuaa in Kohala,Hawaii. 1.Section I-Kaawikiwiki Ili. Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Makuahine's land Makai by Kikau's land Hamakua by Keaulumoku's land. This section has been cultivated and there is no house. 2.Section II-Puumanu Ili. Mauka by Koloa's land Kohalawaho by Keaulumoku's land Makai by Moku's land Hamakua by Keaulumoku's land. It has been cultivated and there is no house. 3.Section III-Lelekoae M. Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Kikau's land Makai by Keaweopala's land Hamakua by Makuahine's land. It has been cultivated;there is no house. 4.Section IV-Maliu Ili. Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Kanoena's land Makai by Kaloa's land Hamakua by Moku's land. It has been cultivated;there is no house.The house-lot section is in the ili land of Leleakoae.It has a fence and there are 5 houses,3 of which are for him/Kalamailalof and 2 for Kaulemamoku,who is his father. This had been acquired by his parents during the time of Kamehameha I;no one has objected. Moku,sworn and stated,I have known[Left blank][as]Kaana has related here. Award 8879B;Leleakoae Puakea nui N.Kohala; 1 ap.;4.3 Acs;No.102B not awarded] HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 42 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 APPENDIX B - WEST HAWAII TODAY AND KA WAI OLA PUBLIC NOTICES HAUN &ASSOCIATES 143 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 AFFIDAVIT OF PUBLICATION INTHE MATTEROF PUBLIC NOTICE STATE OFHAWAII SS. Cityand County of Honolulu I Doc.Date: AUGUG 2 7 2018 Pages: 1 PUBLICNOTICE liauo&Associates 6 conducting a cultural Copan) Notary Name:COLLEEN E.SORANAKA First JudicialCircuit assessment(CiA)for a portion of TAM (3)5.6- 001)Por,082 situated in Punka Ahodua'a,honk Doc.Description: Affidavit of E.SO,? ,, Kohn/a District Istarof of Hawaii.The CIA is beinv prepared in conjunction with Specie) Use Freme: Publication N.,.. application to operate Fliaken Ranch as a'Sues! Rance'offeringoctiennies andmats to pegs and iref0.". NOTARY **'''--• local community)All persons having information on7rPUBLICt — traditional cotters)practices, resources and places 1,,,,,, ---?____ AuG 2 7 2018 :*:located within Pongee Ahapaa and the vicinity ofthe project pant are here.by requested to contactNo.90-263 .:.- Solomon Kailifewa,Hann&Associates,73)4191 KaaoNotarySIgnatureDale -- %. z Place,KailasKona,Hi 96740,(608)325-2402within thirty(30)days ofthis notice.s-C>:;').............."..). ‘,..:. 54111125777 8/24,8/26/18) If .s' GwvnPan_being duly sworn,deposes and says that sheis aclerk,duly authod'Aditv execute this affidavit ofOahu Publications,Inc.publisher ofThe Honolulu Star-Adveniser,MidWeek,The Garden Island,West HawaiiToday,and Hawaii Tribune-Herald,thatsaid newspapers arenewspapers ofgeneral circulation in the State ofHawaii,and thatthe attached notice is true noticeas was published inthe Honolulu Star-Advertiser 0 times on: MidWeek 0 times on: The Garden Island 0 times on: Hawaii Tribune-Herald 0 times on: West HawaiiToday 2 times on: 08/24,08126/2018 OtherPublications: 0 timeson: And that affiant is not a partytoor in any way interested inthe above entitledmatter, Gwyn PatinCh l...re..0 ./)‘417.. N.,:. .- S )and reme this 4,day of (;?..11"...: 44Z. A.D.20,,i f*i No.90-263 I Colleen B Soranalax Notary Public oftheFirstJudicial Circuit,State ofHawaiiMycommissionexpires:Jan06 2020 44lp..,,. t-OF Ad* 0001125777 SP.NO.: IN. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 44 TMK: (3) 5-6-001: Por. 082 Report 1516-011819 Kepakemapa(September)2018 1 ffr' 'A 9 x ' tiliwiA 4 A o poke chain kwo 1ative Hawaiian ti, ph sh for restricting e 48 the use of aloha PAGE14f,5 c r •• 0 t t ' i Illatt.t„ 4 1 44444, k`# PUBLICNOTICE Associaesisoondktinga cuiaaaliectassesstnau(CIA)far a portionof77vFK(3)S6 OOI Pac 082 situated in Atakea Ahupua'a, 7= L C7A being c10mS PuaUkaa k t.Ranchas a"Gust !n<fering 7 1 - apivities and events to guests andI t dw local community.All person. havinginfmnatimontraditiwtal al- anal practices,resources and plod 9 xr. loaned withinPuakeaAhupua'aand the victim),oldie Project Parcel on, 9L L J :Ir, contact$Olt.* t'=+ Kailiriwa.Haus&Aoan4nses.lioha"spurkea potemm{uc go. r 734161KaaoPLtce.KailtraHl Photo:Don Kosbetger- <, rXi7967,10.(&l6)3°3-2102 withinKoma dtirty , 10tdaysofdnsnau°e HAUN &ASSOCIATES 145 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawai`i Appendix 3 Archaeological Inventory Survey Report 1510-022019 DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY TMK: (3) 5-6-001:POR. 082 rt R P e2,...,,• A). - . q . a- f)4').4-.-.)) .-.717.;,i,.:.'...:, .,., 4`;'-`11.):4".i .. r ° ms`»_le - tv Y'C^ ., ,,fir."a ta .i yy- l I t: 24 t y + i 1R1 r , 1E ft v: N. w r,, ate" tis , A P•UAKEA iIHUPUA`A NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT, ISLAND OF HAWAII HAUN & ASSOCIATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL,AND HISTORICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES 73-41 61 Kano ROAD, Ca 1-ua KONA HI 96740 PHONE: 808-325-24C2 Fax: 808-325-1 520 Report 1510-022019 DRAFT ARCHAEOLOGICAL INVENTORY SURVEY TMK: (3) 5-6-001:POR. 082 PUAKEA AHUPUA`A NORTH KOHALA DISTRICT ISLAND OF HAWAI'I Prepared by: Alan E. Haun, Ph.D. and Dave Henry, B.S. Prepared for: Puakea Ranch 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway Hawi, Hawai'i 96719 February 2019 HAUN & ASSOCIATES ARCHAEOLOGICAL, CULTURAL,AND HISTORICAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT SERVICES 73-4161 KAAO ROAD, KAILUA-KONA HI 96740 PHONE: 808-325-2402 FAx 808-325-1520 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 MANAGEMENT SUMMARY Haun &Associates conducted an archaeological inventory survey of a 2.14 acre portion of TMK: (3)5-6-001:082; a 32.411 acre parcel in Puakea Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. The archaeological inventory survey objective 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 276 and 284, State Historic Preservation Rules. This AIS is prepared in conjunction with a Special Use Permit to be prepared for the County of Hawai'i Planning and Building Department.The landowners propose to operate the Puakea Ranch as a "Guest Ranch"with the 2.14 acre project area to be used for weddings and other functions and events.. The archaeological inventory survey identified three features (Features 7, 10.1 and 13) of a previously identified site.The Puakea Ranch headquarters was recorded by the landowners in a June 2009 National Register of Historic Places form (NRHP) and the ranch buildings were subsequently assigned State Inventory of Historic Places (SIHP) site number 50-10-02-90711.The features consist of a modern building built over an historic concrete slab(Feature 7), a section of the Feature 10 wall designated as Feature 10.1, and a newly identified concrete slab that appears to be historic in origin (Feature 13). A chicken coop and a farm stand have been built on the Feature 13 concrete slab. The portion of Site 9071 in the project area is unaltered and in fair condition.The previously prepared NRHP form indicates Site 9071 is assessed as significant under criterion "a" because of its association with events that made a contribution to the broad patterns of history (sugar cane cultivation and cattle ranching), under criterion "b" due to its association with Dr. James Wight, under criterion "c" as an excellent site type example, and under criterion d"for its information content. Site 9071 was determined eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places. The proposed development will have an effect on the historic properties within the project area. The landowner proposes minimal impacts to the 2.14 acre project area, consisting of constructing an approximately 2500 sq foot space that contains an Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA) approved restroom, kitchen facility and a space for set up in an enclosed area.The majority of the area will not be impacted by the proposed development and will function as an open event area for weddings and other functions; however,the Feature 7 and 13 slabs will be destroyed to make way for the ADA improvements.The Feature 10.1 wall will be preserved. The Feature 7 and 13 slabs are not integral components of the Puakea Ranch and functioned as minor elements of the facility. In order to mitigate their destruction, the proposed restroom will be designed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for rehabilitation which is defined as"...the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration, which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architecture, and cultural value." NPS.gov.) The restroom will be aesthetically compatible with the other historic structures on the property, constructed with board and batten siding and corrugated metal roofing. The restroom will be constructed in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the remaining historic properties and its environment would be unimpaired. Cover photo: Overview of project area(view to south) 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, 02=Hawi quadrangle,9071=Site number HAUN &ASSOCIATES I ii TMK : ( 3 ) 5 -6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Contents MANAGEMENT SUMMARY ii INTRODUCTION 1 Scope of Work 1 Project Area Description 1 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND 9 Historical Documentary Research 9 Previous Archaeological Research 24 PROJECT EXPECTATIONS 29 CONSULTATION 29 FINDINGS 31 CONCLUSION 37 Discussion 37 Significance Assessments 37 TRANSLATION OF HAWAIIAN WORDS 38 REFERENCES 39 APPENDIX A: LAND COMMISSION AWARDS IN PUAKEA AHUPUA`A (FROM WAIHONA Al NA) 43 APPENDIX B: NRHP NOMINATION FORM 49 Figures Figure 1. Portion of 1995 USGS 7.5' Hawi Quadrangle showing project area 2 Figure 2.Tax Map Key(3)5-6-001 showing project area 3 Figure 3. May 15,2018 aerial view of project area vicinity from Google Earth 4 Figure 4.Grass lawn (view to south) 4 Figure 5.Grass lawn and dirt road (view to southeast) 5 Figure 6.Guinea grass(view to north-northwest) 5 Figure 7. Dirt road and guinea grass(view to west) 6 Figure 8. In-ground swimming pool(view to northeast) 7 Figure 9. Boulder pushpile(view to west 7 Figure 10.Ahupua'a boundaries 10 Figure 11. Map of the North Kohala District from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:4) 11 Figure 12, Map of the North Kohala District at Contact from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:17) 12 Figure 13.Tomonari-Tuggle's(1998) map of the Kohala Field System showing project area 14 Figure 14. Portion of Lydgate's 1893 Hawai'i Register Map 1705 17 Figure 15. Map of the North Kohala District in the Later 19th Century from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:41) 19 Figure 16. February 13, 1920 article from The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(from newspapers.com) 21 Figure 17. February 9, 1932 article from The Honolulu Advertiser(from newspapers.com) 23 Figure 18. Portion of 1930 USGS Hawi Quadrangle showing project area 25 Figure 19. 1976 USGS aerial photograph of project area vicinity 26 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I iii TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Figures (cont.) Figure 20.Current extent of Puakea Ranch 27 Figure 21. Previous archaeological work 28 Figure 22. Location of Site 9071 features from NRHP form 32 Figure 23. Feature location map 33 Figure 24. Modern shed built over historic Feature 7 concrete slab(view to southeast) 34 Figure 25. Modern shed built over historic Feature 7 concrete slab showing Feature 10.1 wall (view to north) 34 Figure 26. Feature 10.1 wall (view to southeast) 35 Figure 27. Plan map of Feature 13 35 Figure 28. Feature 13 concrete slab and modern chicken coop and farm stand (view to south) 36 Figure 29. Feature 13 concrete slab and modern chicken coop and farm stand(view to west)36 Tables Table 1. Land Grants in Puakea Ahupua'a 16 Table 2. Previous archaeological work in Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas 27 Table 3.Site 9071 features from NRHP form 32 HAUN & ASSOCIATES I iv TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 INTRODUCTION At the request of the Puakea Ranch, Haun & Associates completed an archaeological inventory survey (AIS) of a 2.14 acre portion of TMK:(3)5-6-001:082;a 32.411 acre parcel in Puakea Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The objective of the survey was to satisfy historic preservation regulatory review 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, State Historic Preservation Rules 2003). This AIS is prepared in conjunction with a Special Use Permit application for the County of Hawai'i Planning and Building Departments. The landowners propose to operate the Puakea Ranch as a "Guest Ranch" with the 2.14 acre project area to be used for weddings and other functions and events. The survey fieldwork was conducted on October 4, 2018 by Haun & Associates Project Supervisor Solomon Kailihiwa, M.S and Field Archaeologist, Dan Trout, 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 sites with recommended treatments. 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 is a rectangular-shaped 2.14 acre area located within Puakea Ranch at elevations ranging from approximately 530 to 605 feet. The elevations presented in this report are in feet above mean sea level (AMSL). Figure 3 is an aerial view of the project area taken on May 15,2018. A plan map of the project area is presented as Figure 23 in the Findings section of this report. The project area is bordered on the north,west and south sides by a dirt road with a stone wall (Site 9071, Feature 10.1) forming the eastern project boundary. The majority of the project area is comprised of a maintained grass lawn (Figure 4 and Figure 5)and areas of dense guinea grass(Panicum maximum;Figure 6 and Figure 7).Stands of koa haole (Leucaena glauca), with kiawe (Prosopis pallida) are also present. Additional vegetation in the project area consists of night-blooming cereus (Hylocereus undatus), hibiscus (Hibiscus tiliaceus), macadamia nut Macadamia integrifolia), royal poinciana (Delonix regia), java plum (Syzygium cumini), monkey pod (Samanea saman),dragonfruit(Hylocereus undatus),and various ornamental plants. HAUN 8c ASSOCIATES 1 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 f Map Locationr HONOKAA ittir..1:4' ' iib. -_,1111Ww"-- 1 r r'` r HILO lAiii---y KawA t.' 'Y-Ari ‘ IN*Isig.k 0KEALAKEKUA P 0A# If ,v • PAHALA a v` U/ Tanks N A 9 ro cy hN e C. S VIN l 1,... '''''...."`'` jr r liw_ ..„,._..,,,i..„,x,„..,„ .- If clig ti } 4 t i t. Aha:” 77 Is. AAilhi. r.-61t44. 11111k..A11-...---.. 411PIor" 1 r4s260--- Appit IIP 11111 11 NJX/41 -T„...... - • 1 c j--2.\\.. V7- 1444 440 i`'\ 0 A4. le i 1--., Yts s S. pp 9 Proje» rea 2 1 A K ; ti )/( X 4 KAHOUI'HgS RICAL y P 6°°orc i 1 STA MO f 10ialiffil t 1.. •17.!,--,, I\ o Figure 1.Portion of 1995 USGS 7.5'Hawi Quadrangle showing project area HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 2 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 022019 t Q U W F K. aQ O.,O 9 t t'tr .az u e 4 t tEtt)t\ te i k 1 1 4 i '1 7 fG V l k \ / Y e y ar N 1 1 a Y w X _r,.' f....00T IAF W s0t3NtfetNy ms tA ' 3'F" 4 Cot. P Arn Z J t r. O W pl""(\ ,1, l, a r„---.1 r W ifit' ,10 _ ." , : is W z 7,,,-. 40.'‘ s' 4,„4) 11: 5- 1-'''''' ''''...,___ J--: 111.* 1.,1.77-7- ;11 '.; 17 il..: 1," \ 142' o Lfd1snldVt Sj a eT e iia f 1\, o{ • a ' 1 .a. if g a o o 1. 9 iti4 5`: if, a fo + L 'OR.1u Q' Ps E.V \v' Kis IteA. 6, ,i,/ .e'; , 2= t x< of d+' i k 7f w, 4 is r. , 04 A ii ,I a .Q e o t, - " 1, a ,'til L k t2 A e.a 1, 3 1 `'k2 Ali", 1 ' Y ffff R S4 r C el I 4K 1- 3. d0JLft'1N HAUN &ASSOCIATES 13 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Rant-, TMK:(3)5-6 -a 82 1 ii\... , Project aces . 4 Figure 3.May 15,2018 aerial view of project area vicinity from Google Earth Hryy n. z Figure 4.Grass lawn(view to south) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 14 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 -6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 rt" Figure 5.Grass lawn and dirt road(view to southeast) Figure 6.Guinea grass(view to north-northwest) HAUN &ASSOCIATES ( 5 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 e 19' t 4' t f awaia = s9s .. e. A! # {.yam.:. L- ( 9 1C. x ;-ra`s a r 6)"/ Figure 7.Dirt road and guinea grass(view to west) There is an in-ground swimming pool located in the western portion of the parcel (Figure 8)and a concentration of boulders located in a stand of trees to the west of the pool (Figure 9).The boulders were likely bulldozed into their current location during the ranching activity in the area.A modern shed built on an historic concrete slab is located along the eastern boundary of the project area (Site 9071, Feature 7) and an historic concrete slab with a modern chicken coop and an egg stand is located in the northern end of the parcel (Site 9071, Feature 13). These features are discussed in detail in the Findings section of this report. The soil in the project area is Kohala silty clay(KhC)on 3-12%slopes.This soil is characterized by an approximately 14-inch thick surface layer of dark silty clay, over an approximately 25-inch thick subsoil of silty clay loam and silty clay (Sato et al. 1973:31). This is underlain by a substratum of weathered igneous rock. It is classified as suitable primarily for sugarcane with small areas used for pasture, orchards and truck farms. The underlying weathered igneous rock substratum was deposited during lava flows associated with the Hawi Volcanic Series (Wolfe and Morris 2001:14 and Sheet 1) and according to Macdonald and Abbott (1970) these flows were deposited approximately 60,000 to 250,000 years ago. Annual rainfall in the vicinity of the project area ranges from 204 to 750 mm (8 to 30 inches; Giambelluca et al. 2013).The mean average temperature in this general area is approximately 73.8 degrees F (usclimatedata.com). . There are no surface water sources in the project area. 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 Hawaii at Hilo Hawaiian Collection,the Land Survey Office and the Archives Division of the Hawaii 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. HAUN &ASSOCIATES ( 6 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 Figure 8.In-ground swimming pool(view to northeast) iP>t k a d4.2- ,:- Figure 9.Boulder pushpile(view to west HAUN a ASSOCIATES 17 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 The field work portion of the project consisted of a 100% surface examination of the parcel with the surveyors walking transects at 5-meter intervals. Ground surface visibility throughout the parcel was fair to excellent. The features identified during the project were flagged with pink and blue flagging tape and their locations were determined with the aid of a Garmin Global Positioning System (GPS) Model 60-series device using the North American Datum (NAD) 1983 datum. The accuracy of the GPS device for a single point is +1- 3-5 m. This accuracy was increased to approximately 2-3 meters by taking multiple points including property corners and overlying the plotted points on a scaled map using AutoCAD software. The three features of Site 9071 in the project area were documented by completing a standardized site form, and photographic documentation.The Feature 13 slab with modern chicken coop and farm stand were also recorded by preparing a scaled plan map made with hand tapes and compass. Due to the historic age of the features, no subsurface testing was conducted and no cultural material was recovered for analysis. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 18 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL BACKGROUND Historical Documentary Research The project area is situated in the ahupua'a of Puakea in the northern portion of Hawai'i Island (Figure 10). The project area is located within the boundaries of the historic Puakea Ranch headquarters area and is situated approximately 100 meters inland of the Akoni Pule Highway (Highway 270). The project area is located approximately 800 meters seaward of Puu Ula (see Figure 1) and is situated approximately 2,400 meters (1.5 miles)inland from the shoreline at Puakea Point. According to Ulukau, the Hawaiian Electronic Dictionary (2018), Puakea is literally translated as "Pale or wanting color". The ahupua'a originates at the shoreline between Puakea Point and Hianaula Point and extends inland 4,100 meters(2.5 miles)to approximately 1,240 ft elevation. It is bordered on the north by Honoipu Ahupua'a and on the south by Kukuipahui Ahupua'a. Tomonari-Tuggle (1988) presents a comprehensive historical overview of the North Kohala district, separating the area into two distinct geographic zones; the windward and leeward areas which are divided by the ridges of the Kohala Mountain range in a northwest by southeast direction (Figure 11).This line extends between Pu'u Kahone in the northwest to Pu'u Pili in the southeast and serves as the demarcation between the dry leeward side and the relatively wet windward side. The project area is located in the leeward area. According to Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:5): The long ridge of Kohala Mountain lies perpendicular to the predominant moisture-laden northeast trade winds and acts as a deflector, pushing the trades upward, where the resultant cooling condenses the moisture,forming clouds and rain over the summit.The rainfall decreases on the leeward side as the air warms in its return to lower elevations. High rainfall is centered over the head of the windward valleys, where average measurement is 200 inches.At the mouth of the Honokane Nui Valley, it is 60 to 80 inches,decreasing northward toward Hawi where it is 50 inches per year. On the leeward side, median annual rainfall is approximately 60 inches at Pu'u Hue, which is 579 m (1900 ft) above sea level (Taliaferro 1959:136-137) and approximately 13 inches at Mahukona at the coast. (Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:132-133). Tomonari-Tuggle cites several historical accounts that document the extensive agricultural use of Kohala.The extent of the agricultural fields at contact is presented in Figure 12. According to this figure,the project area is located in the area of non-irrigated agriculture.The During Lt.King's 1779 exploration of the Kohala region,he states: The country, as far as the eye could reach, seemed fruitful and well inhabited...[three and four miles inland, plantations of taro and potatoes and wauke] neatly set out in rows. The walls that separate them are made of the loose burnt stone, which are got in clearing the ground; and being entirely concealed by sugarcanes planted close on each side, make the most beautiful fences that can be conceived. [The exploring party stopped six or seven miles from the sea] at the second but they found among the plantations...To the left a continuous range of villages, interspersed with groves of coconut trees spreading along the sea-shore; a thick wood behind this; and to the right, an extent of ground laid out in regular and well-cultivated plantations,as far as the eye could reach(cited in Tomanari-Tuggle 1988:16-18). HAUN &ASSOCIATES 19 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 OrUpoluAirport 3 v< vS. \ Limukoko Poke,.,- r \ r Umiwal Bay \ Al ' \ ?. \ \, r. \ r- / F N Upoiu Airport Road 95 \ r \ v \ N. N J \1 r— s. \ 9 \ V \'; A 1 \ \ Ra FA \ Honoipu lartding N to 9 \\ \ I Puakea Point t'L Holana Bay v A t` y' N Akonl PuleHwy y0 N. (Hwy270) A ti07AG N GRkFQ N.6. c.41, f' N. N i 800 w Yr 1 \ Jf/ m 411Projectaea\( S i T \\ S y \ TMK:(3)543.0011182 \ C3 N. s N N\ 1 N N., KUKUIPAyu N.Kohala Dkch 1000'.. l Alcorn Pule Hwy J Hwy 270) J s I 600 ii AINALua Contour Interval=200 ft n 400 30000 Ahupua'a Boundary 200 0 Doom Ditch Figure 10.Ahupua'a boundaries HAUN & ASSOCIATES 110 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 IGQHALA ' ,. FIquR. I. Ti•DISTRACT OF NOR:11.1 KOHALA ISLAND OF WAWAI'I i woa. .1,' MUD O b 4 IW. ir'..- PUNA icMU j Viarta Pt Ka u. WINDWAQP KuLA *LOPES MAMA= f ) 1Csuttdt Pt. IuuA NDrtot N iu'r 1 J t I f: aanonc f j .: / „t • 1I pt Ba fa'>t NAWI / KA4141 PA1 ' AU ay Project i/ / f (41`,Y Neas Ba area y fl wrovkftutep t / 1 roioiu f r 1:i Nonok.nu Nui I f ; GI s M3hukotU f i ; y 1.3t. Rem P CLsti rn* r 3 Lihikiola 1{ a 33a3 TMK ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . Report No 1510 - 022019 c. °M010141N1 AZIA1-i 4--- -....-------• _ 3 _....----...- O , ""' <"1.-- % .... •••••;,......---- .,--....-51/7"........-°>0 II 4-0 C'e.6..-- 1, „1 hi..•, ------_,--'----<- - O..., V.A414,0LA PT.tc, •-- r• s -4 e- t_ ...., 0,..----.? ••••, 4,- :-. 3 g 1,.. x _...1.4, '', 44:9 ` .f- .4. C ' v 3.- "------_-. '. itapg.t.i toyAlo,,, .., _,•-" * - z • .. •• g: .r .•-•...---",--:.--;-* -V-4 -- -':-A-- c c. •,' N'' 7.- - ... •-',4,..-b KAPAPIAIA 614;4 7 1...... te .T..,: .4...>:: an'a ---';':"--,-;--..----"----;..-....-- ------- ----- .-T ':_.7:::P.37.,-:..• -.. .°Ao 4,,.., tis, 4'.4•$.y V A.. '--...':._ PJEME 6AT H4AW ..,,,,6, c...., r- e......T....5....._ rrr:::::•.....>......_.:.:' ....." ...--.......,_„-..... .:.......,1:......,_. ,...ri.:...._. 4,...•..,......1......„.....:•- •:::„......_:_----• N.whi.i0,...--- ..---',....-',...--'__-,'-..---: - . ....,;......? 7....-:."•••••:- ..-7.1.. ir POL.OU-.1 KAF• A'A--;.,-,-._„,---- S'---.:--.r.:-k-- 410N106.N4 Er HLICONA was.WAIGI;7411 --53-- A. -.5:-.--- Al.,.... g ' -,- 4AF:c&C-C.. ..-- -- ....41-%--%:' LAPAALOLDA 9 1- .:-• ..„..--w c? - 7•04-•>""- :.--•",---! ---.....S----_-• rje bcsa,•L ."-....---_............;.----------- ',..--- ... iik- ----spe.).6 ....„../„ 01"' og' r"-</-''..---'--_. - ;- u 7.•-•404P...-- WAAL/71_0A i,P.°°4•30' -----" ------<-_---- 410'•WIMP 1.-7, i 5-2,....-- ...., Z '.7c ICZNENA If.4,"•'. A.?. ----;----<:".".__- :_>-----_--'.':'-------_...-----1..kkauoci c- 1 i.' 4.•0., ,_%,, e.„....--------,.......... ..-.._ 1A4.Nalt3P s)". 1 0 ..v" r...“,,i4 z 48. e--_____.---- ac. e. KEW/VA:46;1 13Ay . st •- e,i, .....---\____,--e------L,4'' cl,' ,•,'4 v>vfr V 4-7 e.--- •., i '4O" 43' 10- v.. _,,,41 7- A. WAIAKAIU0 aftly Z P' KAI'OFAE. •FIGUR.E, 3. o NOR,T14 KOHALA AT GONTAGT: TI-1E. LATE. laih GENTUR.i KNOWN AEA6 OF yETTL.tmENT trircRRLD A ..:15 OP 5ETTLCMCNIT 4.--, itIzt•5 OF NOW-IKR.ICiLTED 44eiciALTI4R.e. AEA.5 or IRRIGATE!" 402.1C61L.714QP- o L 3 MI A weiommotir-eimm.... —e•••••• O I Z D .1 gm r..tmi.u. ANUPLIA'A c. CINIX.R. CANE Alistra.CL NAME5 PROM elf5 Kogita.A 1,,,INIDNI CHURCH Pile.,45C1250r9 600x., LoCz-NOP4 'TAKEN FEDm 1915 I1 TO926RAP•IC. po,t.F-5' EeiEy Figure 12,Map of the North Kohala District at Contact from Tornonari-Tuggle(1988:17) HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 12 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Similar observations were made in 1793 by Archibald Menzies and in 1823 by William Ellis. According to Ellis, Streams of water were frequent, and a large quantity of ground was cultivated on their banks, and in the vicinity 1963:19)",and Menzies states: From the north-west point of the island ['Upolu Point], the country stretches back for a considerable distance with a very gradual ascent,and is destitute of trees or bushes of any kind. But it bears every appearance of industrious cultivation by the number of small fields into which it is laid out(cited in Tominari-Tuggle1988:20). As indicated above, the project area is located in Tomonari-Tuggle's (1998) Leeward area. The agricultural use of this area is characterized by a," ...massive field system [the Kohala field system] which sweeps across the leeward slopes of Kohala [and] reaches the coast at the ahupua'a of Kukuipahu" (1988:11-23). This field system extended from the shoreline inland to the forests, and was characterized by cross slope walls designed to block the prevailing trade winds. Using aerial photographs, Tomonari-Tuggle created a map depicting the extent of the Kohala Field System (Figure 13). As indicated in this figure, the present project area is located along the northern fringes of the complex. The North Kohala District is of particular significance as the birthplace of Kamehameha I,who was born just to the south at Mo`okini Heiau (see Figure 12). The district was also the place where his armies gathered to prepare for war and was a training ground for young warriors(I`i 1983:15).According to the National Park Service website,the Mo'okini Heiau is one of the first luakini or sacrificial heiau in the Hawaiian Islands. It is described as follows: Tradition says that a temple was first built on the northernmost tip of the Island of Hawai'i sometime in the 5th century by the high priest Mo'okini. Later oral tradition says that the current heiau was built on the older temple between the 13th and 14th centuries by Pa'ao, a legendary priest from either Tahiti or Samoa who is said to have introduced the Hawaiians to human sacrifice, the walled heiau, and several types of kapu — the system of religious, political, and social laws that governed every aspect of daily life. Pa'ao was said to have lived near Mo'okini Heiau and founded a lineage of priests that served the ali'i'ai mo(paramount chief)of the Island of Hawai'i through the early part of the 19th century. Ancient Hawaiians had many types of heiau, each with their own distinct function and use by particular segments of society. Heiau ranged in size from single upright stones to massive and complex structures. Larger heiau were built by ali'i (chiefs), but the largest and most complex, the luakini heiau(sacrificial temple),could only be constructed and dedicated by an ali'i'ai moku. Luakini heiau were reserved for rituals involving human or animal sacrifice and were generally dedicated to the war god Ku. Rituals performed at a luakini heiau highlighted the ali'i 'ai moku's spiritual, economic, political, and social control over his lands and his authority over the life and death of his people. Mo'okini Heiau was active through the early part of the 19th century and was Kamehameha l's war temple, housing his family's war god Ku-ka-'ili-moku before the transfer of the god to Kamehameha's new war temple Pu'ukohola Heiau, 21 miles down the coast near Kawaihae. Kamehameha l's son and heir Liholiho also used Mo'okini Heiau. In 1819, after his father's death, Liholiho ended kapu and abolished that part of the Hawaiian religion that depended on heiau. In spite of royal orders that they be destroyed, Mo'okini and several other large heiau were spared. It was believed that they had acquired mana (spiritual energy), which protected them against human destruction. (https://www.nps.gov) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 113 5 1 0 - 0 2 2 0 1 9ReportN ° . 1 --r 082001 : P ° .k3 ) 5 - 6-T M ''' st ga pit pm 1tiii-- 1q0. 1HVNVdV1 lilit— wiagl t filipliiiil• airmitiliiinfil SI ity- miiiiililNovita4. 1 _n TrrtL.. 6 ' „, II ilimitentli., In \I1llflhI 4 " " itaning- 111 It. 1 1 i 1‘ at WA I WO*4 1 MLt 74,. 1 1 1 1 VA kg !, 1 i il' t11111 ii I a" II r' ilirr111111iKAIliassibthr1Itzwifinammilimbilik- k d ''- *''.. ----' 1*11 11111110111111316MNI 11/ 11 t, t 1 1 11.1 i 1 dralD%111 e." mi I vo. von 111145:11111/li ' mpg.% tt I D.0 ig 1 I fru. i i ... 4Z co 77----------- intuintrm- ' igillitilivi,IL.....t.TIA: ,--....':: 4.;., 4 03 I III/i 'II Ilk; de li. ftin 1 43i1f4D I It 1 W 141..tt- 2 m4 to fill /147 714T43- ri 4ttril . 44' E 11;11. dill I/ .....141 41110! i! cu t,_illifihrlf NIP if .. .....,..._, TM' toit"' wrgutli iiraw ". eu iz h t, v d\V pr )( II \ --- 7( i&".,!.,." 1110 lillif lb ***11 cu I II ill lib * 4., I/ 1+— O I 11 1 ttxit ii 0. ii / / Lu 7.,o. Ira./ I— tts, vit s. r 4- cr, 1444ffg 4 I. 1111 - ii 1 i 1 if a S 1 z= VP 1 ecu a s..... Olin :-'---- ' ,' whif // _ f, ii Ill,1 vittia ri c. 1 ..... 1 '4 u—'..".: Is 0 2 wirfifit truiter h ii a o-j "a'" ,,J.,... h, .444/ 1 E Ili 4,A# 4144440/414 I 0 1. itt s .", i efi1 1 o 1--- 1-, If, ui < to it 3 0 ! t., 0 ,),:,_._ kl t,...7 ILI ‘...1: o 1i II U. ....I HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 14 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 In January 1778 Cook landed in Waimea, Kauai and the culture of old Hawaii began its spiraling change(Day 1992). Cook left Hawaii for several months, but returned later in the year. Kalani`opu'u was fighting Kahekili's forces in Wailua, Maui on November 19, 1778 when Cook's ship was sighted on his return trip to the islands. Kalani'opu'u visited Cook on the Resolution,while Kahekili visited Clerke on the Discovery(Kuykendall and Day 1976:16). When Cook sailed into Kealakekua Bay on January 17, 1779, Kalani`opu'u was still fighting Kahekili on Maui.At this time Kahekili's brother Ka'eo-kulani was ruling chief of Kauai; Ka-hahana was ruling chief of Oahu and Molokai; Kahekili'ahumanu of western Maui, Lanai and Kaho'olawe; and Kalani`opu'u was ruling chief of Hawaii and Hana Kamakau, 1992:84-86, 92, 97-98). On January 25th Kalani`opu'u visited Cook again at Kealakekua Bay, presenting him with several feather cloaks. In February Cook's plan to kidnap Kalani`opu'u as a hostage was thwarted and Cook was killed following a skirmish over a stolen cutter(Kuykendall and Day 1976:18). Following contact with Westerners, the population of North Kohala declined significantly. According to State Statistician Schmitt (1977:27), between 1832and 1835, the population in this area declined 26%. This decline was due in large part to the introduction of diseases by the early visitors.This decline accompanied a shift in settlement away from the leeward coasts to the interior and to windward areas. The economy of the islands experienced change as industry and capitalism emerged. The sandalwood trade was established by Euro-Americans in 1790 and by 1805 had become a burgeoning enterprise (Oliver 1961). By the 1820's, the sandalwood trade was wreaking havoc on the commoners who were weakening with the heavy production, exposure, and famine just to fill the coffers of the ali'i who were no longer under any control constraints (Oliver 1961:261; Kuykendall and Day 1976:42; Bushnell 1993:212). The lack of control of the sandalwood trade was to soon create the first Hawaiian national debt as promissory notes and levies were initiated by American traders and enforced by American warships (Oliver 1961:261, 262). "In the 1820s, the sandalwood trade was at its peak and every tree found was cut for its value.The forests of Kohala,which reached almost to the Kawaihae shore as late as 1815, contained an abundance of the coveted wood, presumably the dry land species"(n.a. 1967:16). The Hawaiian culture was well on its way towards Western assimilation as industry in Hawaii went from the sandalwood trade,to a short-lived whaling industry,to cattle ranching,and the more lucrative, but insidious sugar industry. Sugar cane was grown on all islands and when Cook arrived, he wrote of seeing sugar cane plantations. The Chinese on Lanai are credited with first producing sugar as early as 1802; however, it was not until 1835 that sugar became established commercially, primarily to replace a waning sandalwood industry (Oliver 1961:263; Kuykendall and Day 1976:92). 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 10th 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. 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 Land Commission Awards (LCA) during the Mahele. This database indicates that HAUN &ASSOCIATES 115 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 two claims were made in Puakea Ahupua'a. LCA 8746 was claimed by Keawe and LCA 8879B by Kamalamailalo. Only LCA 8879B was subsequently awarded. The location of this LCA is not depicted on available tax maps of the area. LCA 8746 and LCA 8879B are presented in detail in Appendix A. LCA 8746 to Keawe describes an enclosed house lot with two houses, in the 'ili of Laleakone with two houses on it surrounded by public land. The land passed from Keohokalole to Kekuannui and from Kekuanui to Keawe. LCA 8879B to Kamalamailalo describes a fenced house lot with five houses, three of which were owned by Kamalamailalo and two that were owned by his father Kaulemamoku,The land was owned by Kamalamailalo since the time of Kamehameha I. The land of Puakea (and the surrounding ahupua'a)were divided into land grants between 1852 and 1862. Figure 14 is a portion of Lydgate's 1893 Hawaii Register Map 1705 showing the project area obtained from the Archives Division of the Hawai`i Department of Accounting and General Services (http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map- search). This map indicates that there are nine grants in Puakea Ahupua'a. Table 1, compiled from information obtained the Waihona 'Aina (2000) Mahele Database indicates that these grants ranged in area from 18 to 320 acres. According to Figure 14,the majority of the Puakea Ranch Headquarters area (TMK: (3) 5-6-001) is situated in Grant 2361 to Henry Christenson, with a small portion located in Grant 1999 to Kahionamaka. The present project area is located in Grant 2361. Table 1.Land Grants in Puakea Ahupua'a Grant Grantee Ahupua'a Year obtained Grant acreage 744 Paahao Puakea L 1852 50.2 745 Kaniho Puakea 1852 18 1549 Kaluhilau Puakea 2 1855 24.7 1550 Malamailalo Puakea 2 1855 88.5 1958 Papa Puakea 1855 19.32 1999 Kahionamaka Puakea 1856 107.65 2361 Henry Christiansen Puakea and Honoipu 1857 320 2777 Henere Puakea 1861 32 2848 Henry Christiansen Puakea,Honoipu and Lahuiiki 1862 77.3 By 1858 at least 2,119 foreigners lived in Hawaii. Many were merchants who traded and provided provisions, ranchers and missionaries, who lived in various locations throughout the islands. "Foreigners engaged in agricultural pursuits with the idea of reaping a profit from the land, in contrast with the Hawaiians, who carried on...subsistence agriculture" (Coulter 1971:11). In the 1860s, the U. S. Civil War brought about a boost for the sugar industry in Hawai'i as sugar plantations in the South were boycotted or destroyed. And while Rev. Lorenzo Lyons was busy building churches; lmiola in Waimea, Hoku Loa at Puako and one at Kawaihae (n.a. 1967:18-19), Rev. Elias Bond was getting involved in the sugar business. In 1860, Rev. Bond engaged his "long-time acquaintance" (Stephenson 1977:7), Samuel N. Castle in founding the Kohala Sugar Company on lands owned by Bond and his neighbor Dr. James Wight. The first crop of the Kohala Sugar Company was harvested in January 1865 (KTF 1975:69). Kohala's transition was a reflection of what was happening elsewhere in Hawaii,as the sugar industry grew. The industry brought in tens of thousands of laborers from Asia, Europe, the Americas, Oceania, and Africa to work on the many plantations and mills that were being established on all major islands (Oliver 1961:123). Bond's influence on the expansion of the Kohala sugar industry is described by Tomonari-Tuggle: When Elias Bond directed his efforts to initiating sugar as a major agricultural industry in Kohala,he could not have foreseen the incredible success at his modest venture.His primary concern was to develop a HAUN &ASSOCIATES 116 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 j z jf 3 q i f. ,,,,,,,„,ozi.,4„........;....• . m,, ry q 1 i °Y AIH T r ,rmoi` z ..... 1 1/. p>i< ' i- - - 4 // iy a • o. ' e o t , Qy iI- M 1 1 Q ji 1 1` I. b / y e ICY. t . c y / I / a ; - _. /i , 4/ Q jJ to r i i 1 SS Y. . 0 rt i ' O 1).,, S: LL HAUN &ASSOCIATES 1 17 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 means for Hawaiian people of the district to compete successfully in the market economy that had evolved in Hawaii.What resulted was a vigorous,stable,and competitive industry which survived over a century of changing economic situated. For the Hawaiian people, however, the impact was not what Bond anticipated. The "triumphant march" brought along not merely a strengthened economy but a new and prevailing resource,the sugar industry,which abruptly interrupted the process of indigenous adaptation to Westernization and instituted fundamental changes to the demographic composition of the community, to the organization of settlements,and to the patterns of land use.Kohala during this 50 year period was a frontier community characterized by a variety of people, settlements, and commercial ventures. Newcomers to the district were filling an economic void with numerous and diverse endeavors, from which only a few would emerge successful.The void presented a challenge and what already existed in the district was insignificant in terms of what could potentially develop. The nature of the community and the organization of land were drastically altered. The Hawaiian population, already decimated by disease and outmigration, was insufficient for the needs of market-oriented agriculture,and waves of immigrant labor from the Orient, Portugal, Puerto Rico, and the Philippines arrived. Americans, British, and other northern Europeans came as managers and administrators.All were pioneers,leaving family,friends,and homes to seek better lives in the Kohala sugar frontier. The sugar mills and their associated plantations held a collective preeminence as major agents of change and development in the district. Kohala Sugar Company, Bond's model for economic security,was incorporated in 1863.After a decade of struggling,the company finally showed a credit balance in 1872,which coincided with the Reciprocity Treaty of 1876 between the United States and Hawaii. Although Bond maintained a paternal watch over the welfare of his congregation of laborers, his influence in the operation of the mill and plantation eventually waned before the demands ofthe profit-motive and his increasing age. By the time of Bond's death in 1896,the company was flourishing and completion had arisen in the form offive other sugar mills.Spurred on by the Reciprocity Treaty,sugar pioneers saw the potential of commercial development in Kohala. Dr. James Wight, one of the early haole residents of the district,stated the first of the other mills in 1873,at Halawa. In 1874, Union Mill and Plantation Co. started by the Hinds of Maui and later headed by James Renton,was set up in Honomaka'u.Judge C.F Hart, formerly of Kona, moved to Kohala to start Niuli`i Mill in 1877; originally milling native- grown cane, he soon expanded into a field operation as well. R.R. and John Hind moved to Hawai after selling Union Mill and set up the Hawi Mill and Plantation Co. and its two sugar-growing subsidiaries, Puakea and Homesteads Plantations, in 1881. In an effort to improve operations,the Hawi Company constructed the Hoea Mill in 1904,Star Mill in Kapa'au,operated only briefly in the early 1880s.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:40-42) Figure 15 is Tomonari-Tuggle's(1988:41)map ofthe Kohala region in the later 19th Century depicting the above mentioned camps and mills. This map indicates that the project area was not under sugar cane cultivation. The burgeoning sugar industry also resulted in the development of a rail system used to transport the cane from the fields to mills. The demands of the successful sugar production stimulated the formation of two supportive enterprises. To service mills,the Hawaiian Railroad Company,started by S.G.Wilder in 1881 and completed in 1883, ran from Mahukona to Niuli'i over 17 trestles and almost 20 miles of rail. Previously dependent on ox- cart transport of cane to landings at Hapu'u Kauhola Pt.,and Honoipu,the mills,with one exception,now HAUN &ASSOCIATES 118 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Nt)EA b, MILL HOA uw<t"+ KOMRIA LNOCZ. SONOiPu iv¢,,F.rrsnr:A.•LiNIONLNDt} Nit LL. d i. APtr4 Lr404.441.1.' Proiec' a r+esemsocut KONALA '+KCHRu area x xiaxea LLAVA,NAWi MILL A ''-.....104,4'64 , P%&MLEA. ttMGM.. ' MILL. K363'au ,,yP"u Nilaw.a .. NtULI`E STAR! HALAWA i ; MSU. MILL. A !'ttLiU`1• i:kk1tt yr MILL• 7,- xt,tA,, F1.:Pn{5%,..• ',..1,11,14,4c::,...•_....,:.;:'. r G R AtGE C . SHGASt PiE.LPS 1 MA1WK0M G 1.1Alt.e.cR, Loam) coertz.,eitreT wwo MUG CrO I RIME NUL 111,1,04444 i R XA4141.*ANC 4 ffiqu E. 6. 1\IOR,Tu 1C014ALA IN THE LATE- 19th CENTuR.y I E L1 gt4yAR. MILL i TOWN e RAILRDAP ?A'TION LAND INGI ROAD o2 PATii N 0 Z. 3 M+--F- R.A!LR.OhPrillifI' b 4 KUA. 4 845E11 ON MAP g'1' LIONS (HIST"). Figure 15.Map of the North Kohala District in the Later 19th Century from Tomonari-Tuggle(1988:41) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 119 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 had efficient access to a landing at Mahukona on the sheltered lee side of the district. Hawi Mill continued to uses its landing at Honoipu. In 1884,the rail company carried 20,000 tons of freight and 6,000 passengers (Best 1978:43), proving itself a viable and nearly indispensable means of transportation. At the end of the century, the line was purchased by a conglomerate of plantations; again Hawi refused participation,although it eventually joined in 1912.(Tomonari-Tuggle 1988:42) In 1897,the Hawaiian Railroad Company was dissolved and a new company,the Hawaii Railway,was incorporated.The Hawaii Railway was sold in 1899 to the four Kohala sugar plantations that it served (Union Mill, Halawa Plantation, Kohala Plantation,and Niuli'i Plantation).The Hawi Mill and Plantation preferred to haul cane by wagon to its landing at Honoipu until 1912 when it also purchased a share of the railroad.Passenger service by the railroads ended by 1920 as automobiles became more common. The Hawaii Railway was dis-incorporated in 1937 and reincorporated as the Mahukona terminals. The railroad was eventually abandoned in 1939 (Best 1978:42-48). As indicated in Figure 15 the portion of the railroad in Puakea Ahupua'a is located approximately 1,100 meters seaward ofthe project area. Not everyone was in favor the railroad and its impact the community.Conde cites an 1882 letter from a farmer whose land was being: ruthlessly destroyed by the railroad overseers of S.G.Wilder.This act is equal to that of plain murder, because the livelihood of myself and my family is reduced to nothing,that is. My plants and that of my family are covered with dirt, the taro, banana, ti leaves, coffee, mango, orange, bamboo, and other plants.My property is filled with fruits,but these days it is reduced to naught.(Conde 1971:40) The expansion of the Kohala sugar industry in the 1920s and 1930s required a significant labor force and immigrants primarily from China and Portugal began arriving.The camps where the immigrants lived were typically located in close proximity to the fields so that the workers could walk to work (Schweitzer 2003). In order to supply the needs of the burgeoning immigrant population a variety of associated business emerged. The population of the region went into decline, due in part to young people being lured from the country to larger towns and cities, especially Honolulu. Between 1940 and 1950 the population declined 17% to 4,456 people. By 1960,there were only 3,386 people in Kohala (Schmitt 1977:12). In 1975 the Kohala Mill closed its doors because of the declining population and disputes between the unions and management. As discussed above, Henry Christensen purchased Grant 2361 (location of project area) and Grant 2848 in the interior of Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas (see Figure 14). A sheep ranch was initially established along with some sugarcane cultivation; however,the latter was unsuccessful due to the crude equipment available at the time(Henke 1929:41). Christensen's lands in Puakea and Kukuipahu were purchased by Dr. James Wight around 1875 who subsequently established a sugarcane and ranching operation on the property. Dr. Wight settled in Kohala in late 1840s after a ship he was traveling on wrecked off the coast of Mahukona. He operated a drug store in the area and also served as a Circuit Judge between 1852 and 1863. He was later was elected to the House of Representatives and subsequently to the House of Nobles under the Hawaiian Monarchy(Clark et al.2013:31). Dr. Wight obtained a substantial interest in the Kohala Sugar Plantation and established another plantation in Halawa. He constructed an animal powered mill at Puakea According to an article in The Pacific Commercial Advertiser (precursor to the Honolulu Advertiser) a total of 1,118 tons of sugarcane were produced at Puakea in 1919 with an estimated 1,050 tons to be produced in 1920(Figure 16). HAUN &ASSOCIATES 120 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 THE PACIFIC COMMERCIAL AD;s ' I. and. „., ... Shipments To First of Month, 39,493 Tons Ahirmrot, of 12.M Howaiian sugars,Mokakooa.February 4,for San Francis to February I totaled 311,103 Loos, as,en, rook the following first shipmeots: mannered with 94,1.33 tons shipped to;Fuokea, 1121 tons to Wemern; Cukor February 1,1019. The following tsba Mill,Oat; Haat.093,rhe• two last be'lotion will show the shipments for smell I iv to Crockett. The Annie Johnson's • year classified: r:_rrr totaled 11100 tori_ 119201919TheMaaonsteamerMorrowsadism. €. Sugar Factors. .. 35,750 514.847 February 7,took 831 tons for Crockett. Wets'em . ........... IAA 4,009 The Maronia took 9430 tons to Crockett 'r Refined - 1$13 2.1+00 and MO tons of refined. LoadIngs In Near return t Total .. ........... 39,W3 94.9533 Steamers to sail in the near future '' Shipments since February I have will lord at porta and take shipments leen: Western/ammo.,3.-143;Factors'. approximately as follows; 10 857; refined, 530—a artnd to`al to Marietta Part Alien, 33100 tons to; • date of 53,1013 Sona,of which 2405 tons Western:Manna.H no'o'n amt Kaba'at,; il. txisrefined. about 8080 tow.: Silverado. Honolulu! Olaa'a Pkat Shlinmast Med Stahakona,3200'ens,port Wasters; Several mills have*hipped their first Meriden. Kahului, 3200, ail Wearers.; nagat,sure the last report*week ago. The size of the Maui's cargo is%moor- iOinasent113tonshstheMats,*s`ex.m tail.. et Ma'•onla,which sailed from Nonoil.- The following table chows AlimentstoWednea*tnyr(Seamen shipped Ito first to February I by plantations (Pacifle1inthetheMarsoaia,1'.:09 toms;and the Snlrr.e Mill iaetadea fronokr; tale in.Mata. fromschoonerAnnieJohnson, freludes Koolau Agt'iculturat lU,tt,mrnta11,1„,.i;..tta.ate4 t„l',t., t lint.t-r,rp t tIAWAli alae ?toot.,Co.. t.tal. ..,............. 3.,, Kerns TMS,HKit .. Watskn Mitt C.ti ,,,, ... ...,. 31X)* 11,413 IOW/tartar Co. , .................... 132sn ........ 14.4+81 Hnrait Mtn t'..... Ltd .......,,,,.3,,,,...2.191140 ..,..,-. 763 Maom.n Suss,.'a. . ...................... rt:*I ,... . 1144105 1. t'eg*ke..savor C.. ................._.-Rtes .,.--... 904 333,3 flame= a ScesntuonC3333 tia44 s Co. .................. t521044 Ba 1•04/4 lwa. 1.1 Pug + waaa.., 144* --,....... a.As .. .tt d* .tins'Sum tea 1cPbaaV/ti l'sr`HPtntWa lb. ZAP a. tionokas ...sr l ) ,,.,..,.,,, ii.ean 13,511 Parise angst thin } ...........3333 33ad 441.10 Still sad Wactstt0n Lope n2el Ramses Pbatatl.a erre...--.. ..._ z wi11 Robots*mar tOwe51111C. IMO 3,, . 3,210 Sart Sun sad Phntata.. - 3333.- 10 ........ +tom ikw F'tawtetk,a ,1.300 . ,,.... 1..11$, 6waa twr..t t C....1.143 . _ 300 3, Sntrkltra... 1, wt0' a.. .lb.. ,....,0,4010 3333 .._ 7,5111HeralltoAB4eaharatCo.. 7&014 LTaF 1ASla .. 1,0.1.1 . .......... 174VC MON .3* e Figure 16.February 13,1920 article from The Pacific Commercial Advertiser(from newspapers.com) According to Henke's A Survey of Livestock in Hawaii, the history of the ranch is described below: Dr. James Wight acquired the Puakea Ranch lands about 1875 and continued with the sheep ranch, the sheep at that time numbering about 7000 head of the Merino breed. Robert Mason acted as manager from about 1875 to 1882 and was followed by Hans Martinsen,who continued till 1886,when J. H. MacKenzie became manager for Dr. Wight and continued to 1901. Dr. Wight about 1886 imported two Maltese jacks at a cost of$1400 and he was probably one of the first men to breed mules in Hawaii. HAUN & ASSOCIATES 121 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 Since the sheep suffered from scab, and wild dogs killed many, cattle were substituted for the sheep in the eighties and there were few or no sheep left after 1890. Two Shorthorn bulls were imported from California and bred to the native cattle and Shorthorn blood predominated on Puakea Ranch till 1901,although some Hereford blood was introduced as early as 1889. Beef had little value at this time and many cattle were sold as work oxen for the cane fields. While Mr. MacKenzie was manager water was brought eight miles from the Kohala mountains, some wells were dug near the beach and some fences built. When Arthur Mason became manager in 1901 the ranch had about 3000 cattle. During the next twenty years Hereford blood gradually replaced the Shorthorns. Eighteen Herefords, eight bulls and ten cows were imported from Oregon in 1908 at a cost of$130 each and five bulls were imported from Kentucky in 1920 at a cost of$500 each. (Henke 1929:41-42) Following the death of Dr. Wight on September 2, 1905 at the age of 91. The ranch was operated by Robert Shingle, E. H. Wodehouse, and A. W. T. Bottomley, trustees for the James Wight Estate. According to Adams and Athens (1994:18) by 1910, 8,758 acres of land were under the control of the Puakea Ranch. Water to the ranch and sugar mill were supplied by the Kohala Ditch, which supplied several plantations in the area emptying into a reservoir in Puakea. The supply of water was inadequate for the successful cultivation of sugarcane and the last cane crop was harvested in 1930. (Clark et al. 2013:31). According to Henke, the Puakea Ranch also included an area formerly known as Puuhue Ranch (1929:40). "The headquarters of the Puuhue Ranch operated as a separate ranch previous to about 1906 when an amalgamation with Puakea Ranch was effected which will expire in 1930..."(1929:40). The characteristics of the combined ranches are described as follows: These combined ranches run from the sea to an elevation of about 4000 feet and have a total area of about 25,000 acres and at present have about 5000 Herefords, 350 light horses and 10 Berkshire sows. Good Hereford bulls as well as females have been imported from time to time and the ranches at present have 85 range bulls and 75 selected females that are bred to specially good bulls for the production of the range bulls. The range bulls are segregated from the cattle from July to February. The rainfall at the Puakea Ranch headquarters has varied between 30 and 63 inches since 1920. The water needed for the cattle comes from the Kohala mountains. Paspalum dilatatum has been planted quite extensively and has done very well. Koa haole Leucaena glauca) is being experimented with as a promising low land forage crop. Pigeon peas Cajanus indicus)have not been extensively tried,although results of such attempts as have been made with this legume have not been too encouraging. Plenty of Bermuda grass (Cynodon dactylon) and some red top (Tricholaena rosea) is found on the lower and intermediate elevations and Hilo grass (Paspalum conjugatum) is quite abundant on the upper lands. A scattering of Ohia lehua trees is found over the upper section with practically all their branches on the leeward side of the tree, which is indicative of the strong winds that prevail much of the time. The ranches are in need of more fences and paddocks to facilitate segregation and control of the animals at different ages and to give newly planted grasses an opportunity to get started while HAUN &ASSOCIATES 122 TM K : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 the cattle are kept out of certain sections for a time.These paddocks are included in the plans for the development of the ranches. Cattle are marketed from two years of age to about five, at which time they weigh about 450 to 650 pounds dressed weight. About 500 to 600 are shipped to Honolulu annually, with an additional 180 slaughtered on the ranch for consumption in the Kohala district. Cattle for Honolulu are loaded at Kawaihae.The Mahukona beach is not suitable for loading cattle on the Inter-Island boats. It is planned to reduce the number of horses which are kept for sale to various parties. No mules are produced on the ranch at the present time.(Henke 1929:41) As many landowners did, Dr. Wight brought in laborers to work the land, contributing to a wave of 185,000 Japanese immigrants who came to Hawai'i in the 19th and 20th Centuries (https://keolamagazine.com). Zenjiro Kawamoto and his wife Wasa Watabayashi immigrated to North Kohala from Hiroshima as part of the wave of Japanese immigration. They settled at Puakea Ranch and moved into what would eventually be called the Cowboy House" (see Figure 20 below). The Kawamotos raised three children at the ranch; Masato (Johnny), Yoshio (Yoshi), and Thelma. The family went on to oversee the operations of the Puakea Ranch for four generations. The Parker Ranch began leasing the Puakea Ranch lands from the James Wight Estate in 1932,agreeing to a twenty year lease agreement for a fee of $2,500 per year. The lease of the ranch land is memorialized in a February 9, 1932 article in the Honolulu Advertiser (Figure 17). Richard Smart of the Parker Ranch eventually purchased the Puakea Ranch lands outright in 1944 (https://puakearanch.com). esu.emway. PARKER RANCH BUYS KOHALA (0. LAND AHD STOCK The Mbar*snob Co.on Mann by bent but been by the Petr tomes owned»17-yeat on Innen roan.in a ydkese Out.of me an- nounced i.yhold of the Ponta ranch at an anneal natal et 4{2,800 t sided tothewt.,anttten.TM Mer tench to Waned by apprsodua4y Hader acres es a n- eat of Use PURbaak rat O400 bradofmtge. me Purim tench tantetoe about ke00 arca and 4100 brad of est-tie. and the Wrenn haunch 12.000 awes and 4.100 heed et ann. Attain W. Curb Is Maros and omits*otetreat of the Arline tench obit*mendne to Wonotmu thiotOb the•awwn lint Co. At am nue the sonata and Pus-he.tonne wets under an amelia- notion sparser. the bosom ofUbWrebtthenWmItyodeboese.Rt T.BotteatnstantinettW.Wetgie The tress ardrtp aapued roan a Per ado and at Wet Ube tar WIglit Oe sir treat root se the benellettent SII the lather brat et loot the o,-year tynWNd et the PtrW ranch woo- arty to the Eehapn tench an ea. routed.Sehata beach Co.was InhorpOnaNalopMuch14,loot. at the flet of the atecetba orthetOlhi4theInhaleRanchtOn. pSrtbewd the belts of the Wienbeanisthetureenranchcattle.pollen MAO& Figure 17.February 9,1932 article from The Honolulu Advertiser(from newspapers.com) Figure 18 is a portion of the USGS 1930 Hawi quadrangle showing the location of the project area and the Puakea Ranch headquarters.The headquarters are situated on the mauka side of the historic road that follows the path of the current Akoni Pule Highway. The map also shows a road extending seaward to Honoipu Landing and the HAUN &ASSOCIATES 123 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 railroad extending throughout Puakea Ahupua'a at approximately 170 to 200 ft elevation. A cluster of buildings is located inland of Honoipu Landing and three houses are present mauka of the railroad line. Figure 19 is a portion of an aerial view of the project area vicinity taken on December 20, 1976 by the U.S. Geological Survey and obtained from the University of Hawai'i at Manoa online library http://magis.manoa.hawaii.edu). This photograph shows the extent of the Puakea Ranch headquarters at this time. In the 1980s the Parker Ranch subsequently sold 200 acres of the Puakea Ranch lands to a real estate developer and the Kawamoto family and other ranch employees were asked to relocate. The Puakea Ranch headquarters, including the present project area subsequently fell into disrepair. The Puakea Ranch headquarters was purchased by Christie Cash and her partner James Nelson in 2005. Her desire was to create a "low impact, eco-minded, low-density place for families that was an alternative to the resorts." https://keolamagazine.com. She took great efforts to restore the ranch buildings to their original condition and today the Puakea Ranch provides overnight accommodations for tourists.The area was informally recorded by the landowners in a June 2009 National Register of Historic Places form (Appendix B). The ranch buildings were subsequently assigned SIHP Site designation 50-10-2-9071. The current extent of the facility, comprising the 32.4 acre TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 is depicted in Figure 20. The buildings consist of following: The Saddle House, James Cottage(built 1920s),The Cowboy House(1880s),The Toy Box,The Tool Shed,The Chicken Coop,The Tree House, Yoshi's House(1940s)and Miles Away(1930s). Previous Archaeological Research A considerable amount of archaeological research has been conducted within Puakea Ahupua'a, including the entirety of the portion of the ahupua'a seaward of the Akoni Pule Highway.These projects,totaling more than 750 acres are shown in Figure 21 and summarized in Table 2. Not included in the figure or table are the Statewide Survey of Historic Places survey that extended along the west coast of Hawaii Island and the historical overview of the North Kohala district by Tomonari-Tuggle (1988).The sites identified during these projects were subsequently documented during surveys by Bury et al. (2006),Clark et al. (2013), Rosendahl (1982a, 1982b) and are included in those entries. The prior archaeological studies in the area indicate widespread disturbance associated with historic cattle ranching. Despite this disturbance, 60 sites have been documented. This equates to an estimated density of 13 sites per acre. Between 1982 and 1993 a series of field inspections, reconnaissance surveys and excavation projects were conducted of a 440 acre parcel that extends from the shoreline at Honoipu Landing inland to the Akoni Pule Highway. These projects were conducted by Barrera (1984, 1992, 1993) and Rosendahl (1982a, 1982b, 1984). These combined projects identified a total of 22 sites comprised predominately of pre-contact to early historic habitation sites, along several agricultural and burial sites. A portion of the historic railroad grade that extends through the area was also documented. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 124 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 6 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 022019 z;;::::-\k,-------='-: 1-... 1 i. (,_. ' i,,,,,,, \\--------- ... -.,--,-...._ '14 t.' 31 r _"I ter s. .„ _ . ....,,,‘ ' I ' -,-,.. 4, 0_,t, Aren,' -., ' i . Fs /, / ,. i \qv*, le*§4,11,144. 1 . Z.,...„ e w , , .,. i,),!: e,,6:. . ?....,,, ,,..- i.::.,,,...___,...,:::-1:-.4_3--;„J.,4,7,'4,11.1tirwitin...„,....\"*for ' 4,,,,,,,,,,..., .... ,..,, i, , i.,„„t,.. 4 :7; „dp, --\\. a,',,;, ',,"..!!'',' sl.,'„' , ' '7'‘,.:`,1-,,‘,Mt.,,Tf . lif,...%aa'INIV\-- Akitsiesee 4. 4 jikk;,„ k0. NJ., y r:, k,,.. 4.41 0.. ., ,,,,'---- a t,' d,_ ,4.,,N4 kz. ,,,,,,_ illIrAft,,,,w .. 0 , (,, tooJ \\ 1111k Pli44Z4-0\1:-, ' 44torr Ell. k 1111111 t \ 4444%41\ K I i tic. g r ACy l w x. w,.,ate,.,.+.` y A`".' ,. --.'^' µ. 4\ 010\ tn 4 0 CIro Nimilp L...,,- 112 VII\+'*'*"7--# r*-------------. 7 . ', „ iik% ..,:,,,,,,,,,,,\„\''''' fl—('‘,/,„,.„,_....„\- ..-.'"\-- '-'''''—'' r---"'"-:\''''' :'"-*\"-"'"* s'' , - Cim: n...4'''..:::' 1......,.., , C M 0 LO aCo N v3 no LL HAUN & ASSOCIATES I TMK : ( 3 ) 5 -6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 ry ro tG tip 33 C U d OLa O flco 04- OLG. f0 f0 t0nOl Ol ei 00 I1 HAUN & ASSOCIATES 126 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 f k., 0A:,.„,, In p r+ I.J st til 1 s s. r • MArtA, StME y 4w_. ewe r z..... r ',,, I f K,d4RAl t - a 4,as' 9Yr" 5m+ . wetuditCvowEb ji:. w , „ Y h5 ,g .'JryTtA6C ac r t,Gowsor nw)e a i890) ll s eouceraY i rt r Lp 0rova+Foule awH, Iw t w sux, ecaon Pt fr LfRtU) v`3 eJ1'Wr fKr,./Cec'V AYA LUP+ wf i F:r,rxAevvrup t Project areagr' gHAAU-"AcseEP+TONE' > 1 f r i r 1 40.,,,,,..4, 10 ,.... 3.::;;.#:,....; J` d,"< 7ff`.7+j,et awwv 1.,, _ Fsem. r. L is, i ,a ` 1 t twn rt rowrRtt Mj MATiYE NAwAi,Ax Foy', jig/IREJ.%e [N^v)l r,........,. I t iiiti` « rvsX. 44:409**,,,,,,.. s t ' 1;-11 re tut .!rirFP/ S, Figure 20.Current extent of Puakea Ranch Table 2.Previous archaeological work in Puakea Ahupua'a and surrounding areas Bury etal.(2006),Clark et al. Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeological Inventory 0-200 78.4 25 Cattle ranching 2013) Survey Field inspection, Barrera(1984,1922,1993),Puakea and Honoipu Reconnaissance, 0-550 440.0 22 Cattle ranching Rosendhal(1982a,1982b,1984) Excavation Clark and Rechtman(2005) Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeological Inventory 200-500 215.0 13 Cattle ranching Survey Corbin and Rosendahl(2006) Puakea and Kukuipahui Archaeological Inventory 450-550 24.6 0 Cattle ranching Survey Total 758.0 60 HAUN &ASSOCIATES 127 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 Upolu Airport 11, E mi t 5\ m\\ Limukoko Point 10111111M—\\, v \ N IUmiwai Bay \ 7 N Upolu Airport Road-\' 7 N. N f# 11° \ N\ N 7 \ N. p \W v V S VAN. a vv N. G V ;t N N 4 0 6. 1\ A\ AOGAVA G A` 9 24O \ Honoipu Landing ij- N N. i v°\ v N/\ Puakea Pant G 1 t Aa NC J Br(era(1984,1992.1993) N 1 Holana Bay Rose-dah,,.(1982a 19824.19$ ) Akoni Pule \j Hwy 270) Hianaula Point Bury et al.(2006) I Clark et al.(2013) -- G N VGFA A A f - v 9 N t r Clark and Rechtman(2005)_-_ ti0 N N O% F 8( wr... V i } 1 – 7A d- \\G 0 I Project area \sj. \\ A RkF \ 90 \ Corbin and Rosenda (2006) \ HI NN KUKUIPAHU N, N N. Kabala Ditch m 1040 S Akoni Pule Hwy Hwy 270) i j 600 Contour Interval=200 ft 4000 300011 Ahupua'a Boundary c_.f.-._._..M111111111 Ditch0200loom__ tom Figure 21.Previous archaeological work HAUN & ASSOCIATES 128 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Clark and Rechtman (2005) conducted an archaeological inventory survey pf a 215 acre parcel in Puakea and Kukuipahu Ahupua'a. This survey area extended inland from the Bury et al. (2006) and Clark et al. (2013) project area east to the Akoni Pule Highway. Large portions of the area had been mechanically cleared for pasture improvement; however, 13 sites were documented.The sites consisted of a platform,two habitation complexes,a habitation/resource procurement area, a modified outcrop/wind break, a complex comprised of a water tank, a concrete water trough, and two foundations, a concrete survey marker, a cairn and five modified outcrops/alignments Bury et al. (2006) conducted an archaeological inventory survey of a 78.5 acre parcel in coastal Puakea, extending from the shoreline at Holana Bay inland to approximately 200 ft. Portions of this area were subsequently examined by Clark et al. (2013). A total of 25 sites have been identified in this area consisting of two survey markers, a portion of the railroad grade that extends through the area, World War II Navy tower installation, eight pre- contact to early historic habitation complexes,three habitation enclosures and two enclosure remnants,two burial platforms,two alignments,a mound and three cairns. The area immediately to the south of the present project area was surveyed by Corbin and Rosendahl (2006).The area is comprised of former Puakea Ranch pasture land that had been previously grubbed. No archaeological sites or features were identified during this project. Based on the archaeological work conducted in the area,the majority of the habitation sites in Puakea are located along the coast.The interior portions, including the present project area are located along the northern fringes of the vast agricultural complex known as the Kohala Field System as defined by Tomonari-Tuggle (1988; see Figure 13). PROJECT EXPECTATIONS Based on historic documentary research and on the previous archaeological work in the area it is unlikely that evidence of the pre-contact use of the project area will be present. The historic use of the parcel will likely be evidenced by the remnants of the Puakea Ranch,consisting of historic structures,roads,and walls. CONSULTATION The current landowner, Ms. Christie Cash has conducted extensive research into the Puakea Ranch and the people who called it home. In an October 24, 2017 letter to the architecture branch of the SHPD requesting permission to reconstruct several structures on the property, Ms. Cash provides insight into the Kawamoto family who oversaw the operations of the Puakea Ranch for generations,and a general historic of the ranch.According to Ms.Cash: Because these structures no longer exist and only foundations or ruins remain, we must rely on the oral history of Masa and Thelma Kawamoto who lived at Puakea and were both born at Puakea in the Cowboy House in the 1920's.As children,their mother worked for the family in the big house" and Masa described it as a large two story home with many bedrooms.According to Masa, many big parties and gatherings were held and his mother worked the parties as kitchen help. Masa and Yoshi would hunt pheasants for the parties and his mother would prepare them. He described this to me when he came to visit Puakea and teach me the history he could. From 1870-1928, descendants and relatives of James Wight of Kohala resided in the home and managed Puakea Planation and Ranch.The home was considered to be a grand estate and many parties and gatherings were hosted at the home, as "The Society" was a very important part of the predominantly British culture of North Kohala Sugar's growers and Mill owners. Prominent Plantation Families of the time including Mrs. & Mrs. H. R. Bryant, Mr. & Mrs. James S. Wight, HAUN & ASSOCIATES 129 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 Mr. Robert Leighton Hind and Mr. & Mrs. H.P. Woods were all residences of the estate home from 1870-1940. Beginning in 1928-1932, management of Puakea was controlled Mr. John Hind, who was the president of the Puakea Plantation Company. Beginning in the 1930s, Parker Ranch also took a greater interest and control of Puakea. In 1944, Richard Smart purchased Puakea Ranch from the James Wight Estate where it had been part of the vast Wight Estate holdings beginning in the 1850s. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 130 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 FINDINGS The archaeological inventory survey of the project area identified three features (Features 7, 10.1 and 13) of a previously identified site. As discussed in the background section of this report, the Puakea Ranch headquarters was previously documented by the landowners as SIHP Site 9071. A total of 12 features were recorded as part of the site, consisting of houses (Features 1. 2 and 3), bunk houses, 4, 5 and 6), a garage (Feature 7), a slaughter house(Feature 8),a sugar mill(Feature 9),a series of rock walls(Feature 10),a network of corrals(Feature 11)and a saddle shop(Feature 12;Table 3 and Figure 22). The survey documented a modern building built over an historic concrete slab(Feature 7), a section of the Feature 10 wall, designated as Feature 10.1 and a newly identified concrete slab that appears to be historic in origin Feature 13).A chicken coop and a farm stand have been built on the Feature 13 concrete slab. The location of the features within the 2.14 acre project area is presented in Figure 23. Feature 7 was originally described as a garage outbuilding on the NRHP form (see Appendix B). The feature is located along the eastern boundary of the project area to the west of the Feature 10.1 stone wall. According to the landowner, at the time the form was completed, the building consisted of a concrete slab with the collapsed remnants of a rusted metal structure under a dragonfruit tree (pers. comm.). The metal framework was subsequently removed and a wooden building was built on the concrete foundation (Figure 24 and Figure 25).This building currently functions as a tool shed. It is rectangular in shape and is 18 feet(5.4 meters) long (northeast by southwest) and 12 feet (3.65 meters) wide. Some of the materials used to construct the modern shed were scavenged from other structures on the property. Feature 10.1 is a stone wall that extends along the inland side of the project area. The extent of this wall is presented in Figure 23.The wall is part of a network of walls that extend throughout the Puakea Ranch area that were designated as "Building 10" in the NRHP form (see Appendix B).The wall originates at the northeastern corner of the project area, adjacent to a dirt road. It extends to the south-southwest for 252 feet (77.0 meters) where a 22 feet(6.8 meter)wide gap is located.The wall continues on the southern side of the gap for another 66 feet (20.1 meters) where the wall terminates at the northern side of the dirt road. The ends of the wall on each side of the gap and at the southern end are flared out. The wall continues to the south outside the project area. The wall evidences an overall length of 340 feet (103.9 meters) long, varying in width from 2.9 to 3.6 feet (0.9 to 1.1 meters) wide and 3.2 to 4.1 feet (1.0 to 1.15 meters) in height. It is built of stacked and faced boulders and cobbles with a core-filled cobble interior. Overviews of the wall are presented in Figure 25 and Figure 26. No cultural material was found in association with the wall. Feature 13 is a concrete slab located to the northwest of Feature 7.The slab is depicted on Figure 22 map included in the NRHP form (see Appendix B); however it was not described or assigned a feature designation. The slab is rectangular in shape and is 25 feet (7.6 meters) long (northeast by southwest), and 12 feet (3.65 meters) built of formed concrete. A series of kiawe wood posts extend around the east and west sides of the slab. Several modern additions to the feature have been constructed at the slab (Figure 27). A chicken coop has been built on the slab over the southern portion of the slab with a farm stand located in the northeastern corner (Figure 28 and Figure 29).A pig pen and a chicken/rabbit pen extend to the south. No cultural material is present. The portion of Site 9071 in the project area is associated with the historic use of the Puakea Ranch.The Feature 7 slab originally functioned as the foundation for a garage and has been repurposed for use as a tool shed. The Feature 10.1 wall is interpreted as a livestock control feature likely used to prevent livestock from entering habitation areas. It is unknown what the Feature 13 slab originally functioned as;however,it currently functions as the foundation for a chicken coop and farm stand.The portion of the site in the project area is altered and in fair condition. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 31 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Table 3.Site 9071 features from NRHP form r ,• ., "'`- Parker Ranch Feature* Name on NRHP form name(see Figure Date of Structure Description 20)construction inventory No. 1 Ranch House Yoshi's house 1940s 267 Built from materials salvaged from original home ofJames Wight 2 Cowboy House Miles Away 1930s 253 Moved to present site from Mahukona 3 Cowboy House The Toy Box/The 1929 273 Paniolo style structureOhanaHouse 4 Bunk House The Cowboy House 1890s 270 Paniolo style structure 5 Bunk House James Cottage 1920s 253 Paniolo style structure Bunk Rooms/Tool and 6 Supply Shed n/a n/a 7 Garage The Tool Shed n/a 8 Slaughter House n/a n/a Wooden structrue with concrete trough 9 Sugar Mill n/a 1870 Stack collapsed in 2007 earthquake 10 Dry laid lava rock walls n/a n/a Network of walls present throughout project area 11 Fenced Animal Corral n/a n/a Network of fences(wire and wood) present throughout project area 12 Saddle Repair/Storage n/a 1940sShed Listed as Building#on NRHP form not available M y Y dat ilknas****** 1 — 9071.12 v VP a!** 4 9017-9 . I< 9071-5 f" , 1. ,ijc 90714le$ res-.4 y. 07., ! ,g071-13 mmeMMIII 1.4,,,,,/,,,,, t 0Oo.oaaPntmcaa0000 P 4 X7,3 r ell MO r ObOOb00• 009071 » a' 41 Y irt a Project area O D C 10 4.1011114111111111 tea1111.+041110111 7141! CO lipII0P 9071-10.1r r1 9071.2, 110 A907,E •- s 9071-10 Waits tPuakeaRanch 9071-11-Fences ihroughout Puakea Ranch trot emoted} ROCK WALLS j Figure 22.Location of Site 9071 features from NRHP form HAUN 8c ASSOCIATES 132 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 S A I 7 G i d I o~\ 3 a a N' s' 41146644. 7v NN‘,....: ..,..t ''Srk%,.N\ a m Nc 3 IN8 s\ 1/4:\\ t a a E c0 iii.\ Nip 4 2 H Y a. U t m o dc y7 m° co61L.I. Nini d 3OG LL HAUN 8c ASSOCIATES 133 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Jt k 46 I I o- Figure 24.Modern shed built over historic Feature 7 concrete slab(view to southeast) I. r ' r 74- 6".. 44,*4--' * #14.(....(..*1 '4 , , r a'' fi"..'xCc a aAyi` r : ....4 r, r,i, -—, {do-r..re, ask Figure 25.Modern shed built over historic Feature 7 concrete slab showing Feature 10.1 wall(view to north) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 134 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Figure 26.Feature 10.1 wall(view to southeast) Dittoed din road wire fence Macadamia nut tree Concrete slab Fennstand,%. 4000117eNN. J gt, Gickea coop0440 N Chicken(Rabbitpen m Pt Pen0 1Steet Figure 27.Plan map of Feature 13 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 35 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 -6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 x„. y ,Or c 4 4 TL %. •tlro 4. L.•0•,'•.t.i. Figure 28.Feature 13 concrete slab and modern chicken coop and farm stand(view to south) r. y i r 6 r$ Figure 29.Feature 13 concrete slab and modern chicken coop and farm stand(view to west) HAUN &ASSOCIATES 136 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6- 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 CONCLUSION Discussion The archaeological inventory survey results conform to the expectations derived from historical and archaeological background research. This research indicated that sites in the parcel would likely be limited to historic remains associated with the Puakea Ranch. Three features were identified consisting of two concrete slabs that have been re-purposed for use as a tool shed (Feature 7) and a chicken coop/farm stand (Feature 13), and a stone wall Feature 10.1). Significance Assessments The site identified during the survey is 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. The portion of Site 9071 in the project area site possesses integrity of location, design, materials, and workmanship.The previously prepared NRHP form indicates Site 9071 is assessed as significant under criterion "a" because of its association with events that made a contribution to the broad patterns of history (sugar cane cultivation and cattle ranching), under criterion "b"due to its association with Dr.James Wight, under criterion "c" as an excellent site type example,and under criterion "d"for its information content. The proposed development will have an effect on the historic properties within the project area. The landowner proposes minimal impacts to the 2.14 acre project area, consisting of constructing an approximately 2500 sq foot space that contains an Americans with Disabilities Act(ADA)approved restroom, kitchen facility and a space for set up in an enclosed area.. The majority of the area will not be impacted by the proposed development and will function as an open event area for weddings and other functions; however, the Feature 7 and 13 slabs will be destroyed to make way for the ADA improvements.The Feature 10.1 wall will be preserved. The Feature 7 and 13 slabs are not integral components of the Puakea Ranch and functioned as minor elements of the facility. In order to mitigate their destruction,the proposed restroom will be designed in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards for rehabilitation which is defined as"...the process of returning a property to a state of utility, through repair or alteration,which makes possible an efficient contemporary use while preserving those portions and features of the property which are significant to its historic, architecture, and cultural value." NPS.gov.) The restroom will be aesthetically compatible with the other historic structures on the property, constructed with board and batten siding and corrugated metal roofing.The restroom will be constructed in such a manner that if removed in the future,the essential form and integrity of the remaining historic properties and its environment would be unimpaired. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 137 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior website. 2018 (http://www.nps.gov) TRANSLATION OF HAWAIIAN WORDS' ahupua'a-traditional Hawaiian land unit usually extending from the uplands to the sea ali'i-chief,chiefess,officer,ruler, monarch ali'i ai moku—paramount chief heiau-Pre-Christian place of worship,shrine kapu-Taboo, prohibition konohiki-headman of an ahupua'a land division under the chief kuleana-small piece of property,as within an ahupua'a Ku—war God luakini-temple,or large heiau where ruling chiefs prayed and human sacrifices were offered Mahele-land division of 1848 mauka—inland from wehewehe.org HAUN &ASSOCIATES 138 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 REFERENCES Adams,J.,and J.Athens 1994 Archaeological Inventory Survey, Upland Portions of Kukuipahu and Awalua, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii. Prepared for Chalon International of Hawaii, Inc. International Archaeological Research Institute, Inc., Honolulu. Archives Division of the Hawai'i Department of Accounting and General Services. 2017 http://ags.hawaii.gov/survey/map-search Barrera,W.,Jr. 1984 Puakea Bay Ranch, Hawaii: Archaeological Survey. Chiniago, Inc. Prepared for Puakea Bay Ranch Partnership. 1992 Puakea, North Kohala, Hawaii Island: Archaeological Inventory Survey of Four Sites in the Conservation District.Chinago Inc. Prepared for Mr.and Mrs.George Issacs, Kapaau. 1993 Puakea, North Kohala, Hawaii Island: Archaeological Inventory Survey of Four Sites in the Conservation District. 1993 Supplemental Investigations. Comstock Cultural Resources Management Inc. Prepared for Puakea Bay Ranch Owner's Association and Mr.and Mrs.George Issacs. Beamer, Kamanamaikalani 2014 No Mpkou Ka Mana Liberating a Nation. Kamehameha Publishing 2014, Honolulu, HI. Best,G.M. 1978 Railroads of Hawaii: Narrow and Standard Gauge Common Carriers. San Marino, CA. Golden West Books.CA:Golden West Books. Bury, B., M.Clark and R. Rechtman 2006 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK:3-5-6-01:108, 109, and 110, Puakea and Kukuipahu Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0353. Prepared for Greg Mooers, Mooers Enterprises, LLC, Kamuela, Hawaii Bushnell,O.A. 1993 The Gifts ofCivilization: Germs and Genocide in Hawaii. University of Hawai'i Press, Honolulu. Chinen,J. 1958 The Great Mahele:Hawaii's Land Division of 1848. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Clark, M., B. Bury,and R. Rechtman 2013 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK:3-5-6-01:109, Puakea ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0866. Prepared for Peter Vincent Architects. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 39 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Clark, M.and R. Rechtman 2005 An Archaeological Inventory Survey of TMK:3-5-6-01:111, Puakea and Kukuipahu Ahupua'a, North Kohala District, Island of Hawaii. Rechtman Consulting Report RC-0258. Prepared for Greg Mooers, Mooers Enterprises, LLC, Kamuela, Hawaii. Conde,J. 1971 Narrow Gauge in a Kingdom.Glenwood Publishers, Felton,California. Corbin,A.and P. Rosendahl 2006 Archaeological Assessment Survey for determination of "No Historic Properties Affected", Puakea Private Residence Project, Lands of Puakea and Kukuipahu, North Kohala District, Island of Hawai'i TMK:3-5-6-01:85). PHRI Report 2633-062006. Prepared for David G. Hiester, Boerne,TX Coulter,J. 1971 Agricultural Land-Use Planning in the Territory of Hawaii 1940. Agricultural Extension Bulletin No. 36 Honolulu. DLNR(Department of Land and Natural Resources) 2003 Hawai'i Administrative Rules, Title 13, Department of Land and Natural Resources, Subtitle 13, State Historic Preservation Division Rules. Day,A.G. 1992 Hawaii and Points South:True Island Tales. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. Ellis,W. 1963 A Narrative of a Tour through Hawaii. Originally published in 1917. Honolulu Advertiser Publishing Co., Honolulu. 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. 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. Henke, L.A. 1929 A Survey of Livestock in Hawai'i. Honolulu: University of Hawaii. l'T,J.P. [Translated by Mary Kawena Pukui; Edited by Dorothy B. Barrere] 1983 Fragments of Hawaiian History. Bishop Museum Press, Honolulu. [Original 1959. Translations of newspaper articles(Kuokoa)written in 1866-1870]. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 40 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 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. KTF(Kohala Task Force) 1975 Kohala:AQ Candid View. Report of the Kohala Task Force(March). Kamakau,Samuel M. 1992 Ruling Chiefs of Hawai'i. Originally published in 1961. (Revised Edition.) Kamehameha Schools Press, Honolulu. KeOlamagazine.com—Ke Ola Magazine website. Hawai'i Island Community Magazine Kuykendall, R.and Day,A.G. 1976 Hawaii:A Historyfrom Polynesian Kingdom to American State. Prentice-Hall, Englewood. Macdonald,G.and A.Abbott 1970 Volcanoes in the Sea. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Moffat, R. M.and G.L. Kirkpatrick 1995 Surveying the Mahele: Mapping the Hawaiian Land Revolution. Palapala'aina. Honolulu: Editions Limited. n.a. (No Author) 1967 Historical Notes:Waimea-Kawaihae,South Kohala, Hawaii." [On file at SHPD Library#H-463] 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. National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior website. 2018 (http://www.nps.gov) Newspaper.com—online newspapers website Oliver D. 1961 The Pacific Islands. University of Hawaii Press, Honolulu. Puakearanch.com—Puakea Ranch website Rosendahl, P. 1982a Archaeological Reconnaissance Survey, Puakea Bay Ranch, Lands of Puakea and Honoipu, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5-6-01:24,43,68). PHRI Report 56-060482. Prepared for Puakea Bay Ranch Partnership and Hawaii Land Management. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 141 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 1982b Intensive Archaeological Survey and Test Excavations Puakea Bay Ranch Roadway Corridor, Lands of Honuipu and Puakea, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii (TMK:3-5- 6-01:24,43,68). PHRI Report 62- 070182. Prepared for Puakea Bay Ranch Partnership and Hawaii Land Management. 1984 Archaeological Field Inspection, Proposed Conservation District Residential Site, Puakea Bay Ranch Development, Land of Puakea, North Kohala, Island of Hawaii. Prepared for Puakea Bay Ranch Partnership. Sato, H.H.,W. Ikeda, R. Paeth,R.Smythe,and M.Takehiro,Jr. 1973 Soil Survey of the Island of Hawaii, State of Hawaii. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service and University of Hawaii Agricultural Experiment Station. Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office. Schmitt, R. 1977 Historical Statistics of Hawaii. Honolulu: University of Hawaii Press. Schweitzer,S. 2003 Kohala Aina A History of North Kohala. Mutual Publishing, Honolulu. Speakman,C.E.,Jr. 1978 An Informal History of the Hawaiian Island. San Rafael: Pueo Press. Stephenson, L.K. 1977 Kohala Keia (This is Kohala) Collected Expressions of a Community, A Product of Kohala People. Privately published. The Hawaiian University of Hawai`i at Manoa online library 2018 http://magis.manoa.hawaii.edu Tomonari-Tuggle, M.J. 1988 North Kohala: Perceptions of a Changing Community. A Cultural Resource Management Study. Prepared for Hawaii State Department of Land and Natural Resources — Division of State parks, Outdoor Recreation and Historic Sites. Ulukau:The Hawaiian Electronic Dictionary,A Dictionary of the Hawaiian Language(revised by Henry H. Parker). 2018 http://ulukau.org U.S.Climate Data website 2018 http://www.usclimatedata.com) Waihona'Aina 2000 The Mahele Database,waihona.com. Wehewehe.org 2016 Hawai'i Electronic Library -Na Puke Wehewehe'Olelo Hawai'i Wolfe, E.,and J. Morris 2001 Geological Map of the Island of Hawaii. U.S. Department of the Interior. U.S Geological Survey. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 142 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 APPENDIX A: LAND COMMISSION AWARDS IN PUAKEA AHUPUA'A FROM WAIHONA 'AINA) HAUN & ASSOCIATES 143 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 Claim Number: 08746 Claimant: Keawe Other claimant: Other name: Island: Hawaii District: Kohala,North Ahupuaa: Puakeaiki,Puakeanui Puuoneo,Puulaula, Kalipahale,Paehala,Haliipalala,Laleakone Apana: 7 Awarded: 0 Loi: FR: Plus: NR: 34v8 Male Taro: FT: 77v4 Kula: NT: 121v4 House lot:1 RP: Kihapai/Pakanu:6 Number of Royal Patents: Salt lands: Koele/Poalima: No Wauke: Loko: No Olona: Lokoia: No Noni: Fishing Rights: No Hala: Sea/Shore/Dunes:No Sweet Potatoes:Auwai/Ditch: No Irish Potatoes: Other Edifice: No Bananas:Spring/Well: No Breadfruit: Pigpen: No Coconut: Road/Path:Yes Coffee: Burial/Graveyard: No Oranges:Wall/Fence:No Bitter Melon/Gourd: Strearn/Muliwai/River. No Sugar Cane: Pali:No Tobacco:Disease: No HAUN &ASSOCIATES 144 Trwx : ( a ) s a 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510 02201 Koao(ouTreev Claimant Died: No Other Plants: Other Trees: Other Mammals:No Miscellaneous: 3 No.8746,KeaweJanuary 14, 1848 N.R.34v8 Puakea is the Ahupua'a claim. It was from Kookokvlole to Kekuanui,from Kekuanui to me,Keawe have held it]for fifteen r°mrs,that is my claim for land. KEAVVE rrrrv^ No.O746.Koawe Kaahue sworn,testifies that claimant occupies one piece of land in ||i of Puuoneo,Akupuae ruakaeiki. thus bounded: South by waste land West by waste land North by public highway East by Ill of Puulaula. Also one lot in Ill of Puuleula,Ahupuaa aloresaid. South by land held by Koi|iahi West by waste land North by waste land&public highway East byAhupuuaHonoipu. Also one piece in IF of Kalepahale,same Ahupuaa. South by land held by Kauiho West by land held by Kailiahi North&East by waste land Also one piece in Iii of Paehala,same Ahupuas. South by land held by Keawekipi West by land held by Paahao North&East by waste land Also one lot in Ill of Haliipalala,same Ahupuaa. South by land held by Keawekipi West by land held by Kupihi North& East by waste land. Also lot no.2 in IF of Puuoneo,bounded: South,West, North, East by waste land. All the above-descried lots consist of dry land, partly cultivated.unfenced&no houses on premises. Also one lot consist of one equal half of an enclosure belonging to claimant. Keohokalole,situated in Iii of La|raknn*.8huvuaapvnxrnn,i Said endosure is surrounded by public,i.e.made land belonging to Kcnhvxn|o|v Kehuanui(konohiki)gave the above lands to claimaritA,D. 1833. Kalamailalo. sworn,affirms as above. wI1u1'1uuv4 No.8746,Keawe,October 4, 1848 Kaaua,sworn and stated, have seen in the iii land of Puakeaiki ahupuaa,6 sections. 1.Section |'Puvon,oIli. Mauka by idle land Kohalawaho by idle lend HAUN EkASSOOATEB I 45 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 Makai by street Hamakua by Puulaula Ili. It has been cultivated:there is no house. 2.Section II-Puulaula Ili. Mauka bt Kailiahi's land Kohalawaho by idle land Makai by a street and idle land Hamakua by Honoipu ahupuaa. Cultivation has been done;there is no house 3.Section III-Kalipahale Ili. Mauka by Kauiho's land Kohalawaho by Kailiahi's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. This has been cultivated;no house. 4.Section IV-Paehala Ili. Mauka by Keawekipi's land Kohalawaho by Paahao's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. Cultivated has been done;no house. 5. Section V-Haliipalala Ili. Mauka by Keawekipi's land Kohalawaho by Kupihi's land Makai by idle land Hamakua by idle land. A portion of it has been cultivated;no house. 6.Section VI-Puuoneo Ili land. Mauka by idle land The rest of the boundaries are Idle land Some of it have been cultivated. 7. Section VII-Ili land in Laleakone ahupuaa named Puakeanui. Mauka and the rest of the boundaries are Keohokalole's land.Two houses are there,one ofwhich is for Keawe,one for Kaaua and another house is for Keohokalole in his/Keawe?/claim. Kekuanui had given him his interest in 1833; no one has objected. Kalamailalo,sworn and stated, I have known[Left blank][as] Kaaua has related here. No.8746 not awarded] HAUN & ASSOCIATES 146 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6 -001 : Por. 08 = Report No . 1510 - 022019 Claim Number. 088798 Claimant:Kamalamailalo Other claimant: Kaulemamoku,father Other name: Island: Hawaii District Kohala,North Ahupuaa:Puakea Kaawikiwiki,Puumanu.Lelekoac,Maliu Apana:4 Awarded: 1 Loi: FR: Plus: NR: Male Taro: FT: Kula: NT: 118v4 House lot: 1 RP: Kihapai/Pakanu: 4 Number of Royal Patents: Salt lands: Koele&Poalima: No Weuke: Loko: No Olona: Lokoia: No Noni: Fishing Rights: No Fiala: Sea/Shore/Dunes: No Sweet Potatoes: Auwai/Ditch: No Irish Potatoes: Other Edifice:No Bananas: Spring/WelL No Breadfruit: Pigpen: No Coconut Road/Path: No Coffee: Burial/Graveyard: No Oranges: WalUFence: No Bitter Melon/Gourd: Stream/Muliwai/River.No Sugar Cane: Pali No Tobacco: Disease: No Koa/Kou Trees: Claimant Died: No Other Plants: Other Trees: Other Mammals: No Miscellaneous: Awarded 1 apana,also 1026 dead claim.5 houses No.8879B,Kamalamailalo F.T.107v4 Kaaua,sworn,testifies that claimant occupies six lots of land in the Ahupuaa of Puakea,thus situated& bounded: 1st lot-in Ili ofKaaikiwiki. South by land held by Moku West by land held by Makuahlne North by land held by Kikau East by land held by Keaulumoku. 2d lot in Ili of Puumanu, South by land held by Kaaloa West&East by land held by Keauluoku North by land held by Moku. 3d lot in Ili of Lelekoae(no.1) South by land held by Moku West by land held by Kikau North by land held by Keaweopala East by land held by Makuahlne. 4th lot in Ili of Maliu. South East by land held by Moku West by land held by Kanoena North by land held by Kaloa. HAUN &ASSOCIATES 147 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 5th lot in Ili of Lelekoae(No.2) South by land held by Makaokaia West by land held by Makuahine North by land held by Moku East by land held by Kamikana. Said lots are dry land,cultivated in part,unfenced. 6th lot in Ili Lelekoae(No.3)occupied as a house lot.It is fenced with wall.Five houses stand upon the premises,belonging to claimant&family. Title extends back to reign of Kamehameha I through parents of claimant.Uncontested. Moku,sworn,testifies as above. N.T.118-120v4 No.8879B,Kamalamailalo,October 5,1848 No.102B,(Dead claim) Kaaua,sworn,and stated:I have seen there are in the Puakea ahupuaa in Kohala,Hawaii. 1.Section I-Kaawikiwiki Iti. Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Makuahine's land Makai by Kikau`s land Hamakua by Keaulumoku's land. This section has been cultivated and there is no house. 2.Section II-Puumanu Ili. Mauka by Koloa's land Kohalawaho by Keaulumoku's land Makai by Moku's land Hamakua by Keaulumoku's land. It has been cultivated and there is no house. 3.Section III-Lelekoae Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Klkau's land Makai by Keaweopala's land Hamakua by Makuahine's land. It has been cultivated;there is no house. 4.Section IV-Maliu Ili. Mauka by Moku's land Kohalawaho by Kanoena's land Makai by Kaloa's land Hamakua by Moku's land. It has been cultivated;there is no house.The house-lot section is in the iti land of Leleakoae.ft has a fence and there are 5 houses,3 of which are for him/Kalamailalo/and 2 for Keulemamoku,who is his father. This had been acquired by his parents during the time of Kamehameha I;no one has objected. Moku,sworn and stated,I have known[Left blank][as]Kaana has related here. Award 88798;Leleakoae Puakea nui N.Kohala;1 ap.;4.3 Acs;No.102B not awarded] HAUN &ASSOCIATES 148 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 APPENDIX B: NRHP NOMINATION FORM HAUN & ASSOCIATES 149 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 NPS Form 10-903 OMB Pio 1Cr24-0310 1Fr:was 5r3i20121 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Registration Form This lam s to use in nominating or requesting determinations tur individual properties and distncts See instructions in National Register Bulletin.Now to Compete the Natrona,Regstev of t-listonc Places Registration Farr II any item does not apply to the properly being docunented enter NIAfor not applicabte,• For functions, architectural classification materials and areas of significance,enter only categories and subcategories from theinstructions. Race additional certification comments,entries,and narrative hems on continuation sheets If needed WS Form 10.900.). 1. Name of Property histonc name Puakea Ranch other names/site number James Wright Estate/Puakea Plantation/Puakea Ranch of Kukuipahu 2. Location street&number 56-2864 Akoni Pule Highway not for publication city or town Hawi fl vicinity state Hawaii code HI county Hawaii code 01 96719 State/Federal Agency Certification As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act,as amended, I hereby certify that this nomination request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Pail 60. In my opinion,the property meets does not meet the National Register Criteria I recommend that this properlybeconsideredsignificantatthefollowinglevel(s)of significance: 7ists, t•-?widL 1°cal V2G Signature official Date Aslitry‘ 4eseds.4-12._ 12.46A— Title- State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government I In my opinion,the property meets doesnot meet the National Ragbag'criteria. Signalise ol commenting offload Date Title State or Federal ageneyibureauor Tribal Government 4. Notional Park Service Certification I,hereby,certify that this properly is: entered EIV the National Register determined eligible for the National Register determined not eligible or the National Register removed from the National Register other lexPtain') Signature ot the Keeper Date ol Action HAUN 8c ASSOCIATES I 50 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 Fustiest Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Nemec"Properly County end State 5. Classification Ownership of Property Category of Property Number of Resources within Property Check as many boxes as appty) (Cneca only one box( Do not include pteviously liste-0 tesourose Irl OWOWN i Contributing Noncontributing i1 private building(s) 6 0 buildings public-Local district district public-State site 6 0 site public-Federal i I structure structure 7 object obiect 12 0 Total Name of related multiple property listing Number of contributing resources previously Enter'WA"it property is not part of a muttrpte property listwisp listed in the National Register N/A WA 1.Function or Use Historic Functions Current Functions Enter categories iron instructional Enter categories from instructions) See Continuation Sheet) See Continuation Sheet) 7.Description Architectural Classification Materials fErve,categories from rrtstructenst Enter categories trorn instructions( Lava rock w/wooden posts. Other—Vernacular plantation style foundation: concrete slab Wood/single wall.tongue and groove walls: board and batten,wood shingles roof: Metal corrugated steel other. 2 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 5 1 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 0 8 2 Report No . 1510 - 022019 NPS Fcern 10.4100-a (Rev 01!2009OMB No 10:'.; Ewes 5/31,20,2) United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet PUGIONI Ranch Have.Hawse N/A Section number 6 Page 2 Historic Functions: Building Nurnberc Cat: 1. DOMESTIC Sub: Single Dwelling(Ranch House) 2. DOMESTIC Single Divaing(Cowboy Houle) 3. DOMESTIC Single Dwelling(Cowboy Home) 4. DOMESTIC Instautione Housing(Bunk House) 5 DOMESTIC Instkuborial Housing(Sink Heine) 8. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Agricultural Outbuilding(SuriltiecimerTool and supply shed) 7 AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Agriculkiral OulbUiding(Owego) 8. AGRICULTURFJSUBSISTANCE Processing(Slaughter House) 9. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Processing(Sugar Mill) 10. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Agricultural Field(Dry bid lava rock vrahs) 11. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Anknal Fadily(Fenced animal corral) 12. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Storage(Saddle repay/storage shed) Current Functions: Building Number) Cat 1. DOMESTIC Single Dwelling(Ranch House) 2. DOMESTIC Single Dueling(Ranch House) 3. DOMESTIC Single Dwelling(Ranch Howe) 4. DOMESTIC Single Dwelling(Ranch House) 5. DOMESTIC Single Deeding(Ranch House) 8. AGRICULTURE/SUSSISTANCE Agrkeiturs/Outbuilding(Stun flotsnelTool and suonh shed) 7. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Agricultural Oulbuldrg(Garage) 8. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Processing(Slaughter House) 9. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Vacant(Sup/Mel foundation and chimney) 10. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Agricultural Field(Dry kidlavarock eels) 11. AGRICULTURE/SUSSISTANCE Animal Falsity(Fenced animal corral) 12. AGRICULTURE/SUBSISTANCE Storage(Sacklie repair/storage shed) HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 52 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6- 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 -022019 Puakee Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Nem ci Newly Coolly and Stele Narrative Description Describe the historic and current physical appearance of the properly. Explain contributing and noncontributing resources if necessary.Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property,such as its location,setting,size,and significant features.) Summary Paragraph The property lies along the mauka(mountain)side of Akoni Pule Highway on 33 acres. The land is enclosed by dry laidlavarockwallsandhastheremainsofearliergenerationsofagriculturalandranchingactivitiesuponit. Of the ruins,the most prominent is a small sugar mill chimney in the back of the property. Several house and traditional Japanese bathfoundationsarespreadacrossthelandscape. Still fully existent are five traditional homes,a slaughter house,fenced cowcorral,and a saddle repair/storage shed that testify to the change from sugar production to cattle ranching in the area. The five homes represent examples of local vernacular architecture,are constructed of wood on posts and piers.withhippedmetalroofs. Two of the structures were modified from bunk houses into single family use. Narrative Description See Continuation Sheet) HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 5 3 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 NPS Fwm 10-800,. rPe. 01.2W, OW Na 70240018 IEp.res 5/1!2012/ United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Pushes Florin' Haid.Mas ii WA Secronnumber 7 Page 2 Architectural Descriptions Building e5: Located upon the northwestern side of a gravel road used to enter the Ranch is(Building 5). Old time residents remember that this structure was existent in 1922. County tax records first documented it in 1929. Parker Ranch recordsrecordthestructureasx+253. The structure is an old single man's Paniolo(cowboy)style dwelling consisting of a simple 5/12 inch A frame with boardandbattensidingandwoodshinglesontheexteriorofthebathroomandthenorthandeastfacingexteriorwalls. Theroofissupportedby2X12rafterswith42inchcenterswithvisibletails. The entry is by four steps centered on a deck/lanai. The entry gives passage to the living area with double six-pane slider windows on the makai(ocean)side.The living area includes a kitchen located to the north east rear with a double six paned horizontal slider window located above the sink and counter top. The makai side of the kitchen has a back entry porch that leads to an outside bathroomlocatedtothenorth. To the east of the kitchen,mauka,is the 20 foot by 16 foot bedroom. The bedroom has threewindows-one each on the north,east.and south walls. The interior walls are genuine paniolo style with vertical/inch by2footbattenwith12footoncenterthroughout. Vertical battens are interrupted by horizontal 2 by 3 foot chair rails. Thewallsextenddowntomeetsimple1inchby4inchbaseboards. The floors are typical 1 inch by 6 inch tongue and grooveDouglasFir. The back(north facing exit)steps down three levels to a large lava rock landing that leads to the originalJapanesestylebathhousefuro. The concrete bathhouse foundation is approximately 12 by 8. Behind the bathhouse tothenorthisalargeconcretecisternaproximately16by5feet. This currently is filled with dirt.although the walls we stillvisible. Building#4 Oral histories also declare this structure existent in 1922.while country tax records show 1929. Parker Ranch records listthisasBuildingx270. Located to the south of(Building 5).this is a typical Paniolo Bunk style house with a porch/lanai extending the length of thefacade. The main entry contains four steps leading directly to a tour panel entry door. Three more entries are accessable from the porch.each leading to two or more bedrooms/bunkrooms and the bathroom on the north west end of the building.The house is seperated into these four areas.entered by lour doors.in order to provide privacy to the paniolo families.The number of panels on the exterior doors varies from 2.4,and 5,reflecting the evolution of the house. The porch is unique to the paniolo history of the Kohala district because is consists of three horizontal rails defining theporchwith4by4poststhatare10feetoncenter. It is clear that the constant winds of Kohala encouraged the construction of eaves braced to the support posts. The finish color is traditional of the area--green siding,white trim,and red corrugated metal roof.The front facade has 4. 6 over 6 double hung windows. The single walls consist of board and batten spaced 12 inch on center with 1/2 inch by 3inchbatten, HAUN &ASSOCIATES 154 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 NPS Fain+10400-a (FW'.01120011) OMR No lM4-(101 F, Empires 5031/10121 United Slates Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Puakea Ranch Havel,Hawaii WA Section number 7 Pa.— 3 The foundation is post and pier located on lava rocks. The roof is typical 5/12 pitch with an additional 3/12 extending over the porch/lanai. Inside the house,the main entryway leads to the living room. The interior walls are genuine paniolo style with vertical/ inch by 2 loot batten with 12 foot on center throughout. Vertical battens are interrupted by horizontaal 2 foot by 3 foot chairrailthroughout. The walls extend down to meet simple 1 by tour baseboards. The floors are made up of typical one by six inch Douglas Fir. Located to the right of the living room is a bedroom with two.6 over 6 double hung windows. Passing through the living room one enters the kitchen and dining area. There is a horizontal window above the sink andcounterarea. To the west is an exit door to a covered landing with three steps down to a concrete pathway that leads to a smoke house and wash house in back of the home. (The dimensions of the smokehouse and wash house are----1. Building No.3 This building is noted in country tax records from 1929. It is also referred to as Parker Ranch Building No.273. The building is a typical paniolo style structure consisting of two single man bunkrooms entered through two exterior doors,side by side. Each bunk room is approximately 10 feet by 12 feet,with a single 2 over 2 double hung window adjacent totheentrydoor.The front elevation faces northwest and looks out to Maui. The front facade consists of a combination ofboardandbatten12footoncenterand1bysixverticaltongueandgrovesiding. The north end wall also has a 2 over 2 double hung window. Connected to the bunk rooms to the south is a covered,3 bay area defined by 4 by 4 postssupportingthefrontapproximately12feetby36feet. The foundation is post and pier located on lava rocks. Finish color fOr the structure is traditional,with green siding,white trim.and a corrugated metal roof. Building No.2 This building is first noted on county tax records in 1940. The Parker Ranch structure inventory called this Building 253. Oral histories suggest the home was moved to the present site from Mahukona.perhaps explaing why the building has more of a Plantation rather than a Pan+olo style of architecture. The dwelling is located on the southern part of the property.adjacent to the Slaughter House and the remains of an earlier ranch building. The front entry facade faces the ocean and is defined by its central entry steps. The 12 by 20 deck is an addition,andextendsthelengthofthefrontfacade. The entry door contains 12 panes of glass and a lower panel single door flanked by double sets of double hung 6 over 6 windows. The facade elements clearly are defined by a 1 x 6 inch white vertical andhorizontaltrim. The exterior single walls are covered in a traditional green stained wood shingle. The corrigated metal sheeting roof is centered over the entry with 5/12 pitch.The deck and railing have been altered over time but still consist ofthebasic4x4-crossed bracing. The wood shingles extend throughout the exterior of the house. The front door opens into a 12 by 16 foot living room with natural 1 x 6'Douglas Fir flooring throughout. All interior single walls in the house are 1 by 6 in tongue and groove boards with decorative moldings. A horizontal chair rail throughout HAUN & ASSOCIATES 155 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Nadia,Manch Hare.Hawaii wA interrupts the walls. There are 3 windows in the living area,of which all are 6 pane with sills lovered to 2 feet above the floor. The baseboards are simpe 1 by 6 inches throughout. Ceilings are uinversally 9 feet. Next to the master bedroom a second bedroom shares many of the same characteristics. Only the windows are different, being 2.6 pane with sills lowered to 2 feet above the floor. One window is located on the north wall,while the other is on the east wall. The living room and kitchen are separated by a hall wall and counter top on the kitchen side. The real wall of the kitchen contains a single French door and a pair of 6 over 6 pane windows with sills lowered to 2 feet above the floor. Exiting the rear kitchen door,one steps onto a rear porch extending the length of the building with deck steps leading to the outdoor bath house located to the east. The bath house consists of the same green stained wood shingle and white trim as the house,with a 6 pane,horizontal hinged window facing west,next to the 5 panel door leading inside. The roof is a lean-to. Inside.remnants of the original Japanese Euro can still be seen. The east-facing wall consists of 2.2 paned horizontal sliding windows. On the southern most boundary is the Slaughter House. Slaughter House The slaughter room is approximately 14 by 16 feet in size. The cattle entry is 8 feet wide. There is a 8 foot engry on both sides of the building,mauka and makai. On the southwest end of the building is a 4 foot entryway to where records of the slaughter were recorded and filed. To the southwest wall of the office area is a third opening approximately 3 feet wide where the intestines were discarded into a wheel barrow to be cooked close by in a wrought iron grubber post and fed to the pigs in the nearby corrals. The roof of the structure,which no longer exists,extended over 15 feet where a ridge beam of 4 by 10 fool diameter supported ropes that hoisted cattle for processing. On the northwest side of the slaughterhouse is a concrete bunker trough extending 15 feet into the cround where the fluids were gided away from the building after the slaughter. To the southwest of the Slaughter House are the remnants of a house,which consisted of a 10 by 20 foot building with a lean-to roof. Here the hides were laid flat and salted with Hawaiian rock salt for curing. Once the hides ere cured,the salt was saved for reuse. The hides were then folded and rolled to be sold elsewhere. Building No.1 County tax records first note this building in 1951. Oral histories suggest that this house was build out of materials salvaged from the original home of James Wight. Parker Ranch recoreds list this as Building#267. The exterior facade elements are clearly defined by a 1 by 6 inch white vertical and horizontal trim. The exterior single walls are covered with triditional green stained wood shingles. The corrugated metal sheeting root extends over the entryway. The deck and railing have been altered over time but still represent the historic integrity and architectural ambiance of the home. After ascending 8 steps and crossing a covered porch area.the houses entered through a set of double French doors equipped with double screens. Atter passing through the foyer,the kitchen is to the right and the dining and living area to the left. The living room faces the northwest with views out the French doors to views of Maui. To the right of the living room is what appears to have been a third bedroom but which is now part of the living room. The 6 windows throughout the living and dining area are all 2 over 2 double hung with low sills extending 20 inches from the floor. The floor HAUN & ASSOCIATES 156 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet PunkasRanch Hawn.Hawaii WA Section number 7 Pao 4 throughout the home is clear 1 by 6 inch tongue and groove Douglas Fir. The floorboards are oil by 8 inch butted design to catch a 1/6 inch mouted trim. The single walls are typical wainscot Douglas Fir Intemipted by a chair rail that extends throughout the house. The ceiling is also comprised of 1 by 6 inch tongue and groove boards with decorative moldings. To the east of the living room are tow bedrooms entered through a small hallway that connects the rooms with a bathroombetweenthem. The interior bedroom and bath doors are all 5 panels.plantation style. The eastern most bedroom is also accessible through a read deck leading toward the old Sugar Mill site. The windows in both bedrooms are 2 over 2 double hung with low sills extending 20 inches from the floor. 111,5 Form ID-900-a iRin, 01 2979. OMB N C20- '? HAUN & ASSOCIATES 57 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii.Hawaii Name al Property County and State Stataavant of Significance Applicable National Register Criteria Areas of Significance Mark'sIn one or more boxes for the criteria qualrtying oie property Enter categories from instructions)for National Register liming) Agricultural-Ranch and sugar plantations A Property is associated with events that have made aXsignificantcontributiontothebroadpattemsofour Social history-James Wright and Parker Ranch history.Architecture-vernacular ranch style B property is associated with the lives ci persons significant in our past. C Property embodies the distinctive characteristicsXofatype,period.or method of construction or represents the work of a master,or possesses high Period of Significanceartisticvalues,or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack 1848-1951 individual distinction. 1)7 D Property has yielded,or is likely to yield,informationimportantinprehistoryorhistory.Significant Dates See continuation sheet Criteria Considerations mann'x'ur SN ire boxes Mat sew SIgnlikant Person Property is: Complete only ftCriterion B is marked above! owed bya religious institution or used for religious James Wright A purposes. B removed from its original locationCultural Affiliation. PAulti-eithnic Hawaii sugar and ranching communityCabirthplaceorgrave. D a cemetery. teciffEareconstructedbudding,object,or structure. Arelalutider Unknown F a commemorative property. G less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years. Period of Significance(justification) Criteria Consideratons(explanation,if necessary) HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 58 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-02201 9 Puakea Ranch Hawaii.HawaN Name 01 Property County and State Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph(provide a summary paragraph that includes level of signficance and applicable criteria) The site of Puakea Ranch has been occupied through four eras of Hawaiian economic history. The land was first employed for Native Hawaiian agriculture. The second use occurred after contact with Europeans,as a sugar plantation was developed by private entrepreneurs such as James Wright,using imported water and multicultural labor. A third erafocusedonthecattleranching. Most recently.buildings on the site have been reused as-bed and breakfast'operations of the tourist trade, Narrative Statement of Significance (provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance) See continuation sheet) Developmental tileterviaddltional h1Jd oo(lext information(if appropritde) HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 5 9 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 United States Department of the Interior National Park Service National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Radar eanrd, Haw,Hawaii N/A Page 2 The site of Puakea Ranch has been occupied through four eras of Hawaiian history. The land was first employed for Native Hawaiian agnculture. The second use occurred alter contact with Europeans.as a sugar plantation was developed by private entrepreneurs such as James Wright,using imported water and multicultural labor. A third era focused on the cattle ranching. Most recently,buildings on the site have been reused as"bed and breakfast"operations of the tourist trade. Criteria A: Puakea is located within part of the Kohala Field System,a series of rock and earthworks built by Native Hawaiians in pre- contact times that directed water flow and terraced the land,while making maximum use of rainfall and preventing soil erosion. The success of this system in sustaining a large population is evidenced by the construction of two hieau.or temples,at Kukuipahu and Mookini Laukini nearby. The extensive agricultural system,like the North Kona Field System to the south,are only partially mapped. All 33 acres of Puakea Ranch itself are surrounded by ancient dry stack rock walls.beside a stone corral located inside. Beginning in 1848.King Kamehameha III a series of laws,later known as the'Great Mahele",that sanctioned the subdivision of the island into private.fee simple ownership. Initially Puakea was held in private by the monarch,as crown lands,until Dr.James Wight purchased the land in 1870 from King Kamehameha I's grandaughter Kekauonohi. Production of sugar was then attempted at Puakea. Dr.Wight built an animal powered mill at Puakea to process sugar. The Kohala Ditch was also constructed to provide me large amounts of water necessary,with the water system servicing several plantations before reaching the last reservoir at Puakea. Unfortunately water flow was never satisfactory,and the last sugar crop was milled in 1930. A typical plantation camp had grown up around the struggling mill,however,and when Dr.Wight established his ranch operations at Puakea,the focus of the settlement changed to accommodate that industry. Cattle had originally been introduced to the island of Hawaii in 1793 by British Captain George Vancouver. King Kamehameha initially placed a"kapu"(law)against killing the animals,and the bovine population soared until population controls became necessary. Vaqueros,of mostly Mexican,Indian,and Spanish descent, immigrated to Hawaii to teach Native Hawaiians and others such skills as cattle handling techniques and leather working. The term Espaniolo became reworked into the Hawaiian lexicon as"Paniolo". Hawaii's contribution to cowboy legend was made by Kohala born paniolo Ikua Purdy in 1908,when he won the wold rodeo steer-roping championship. Generations of Japanese.Caucasion(-haole"),and mixed blood paniolos worked Puakea and other cattle operations for over four generations. In the meantime.cattle operations centralized. In 1944 Puakea Ranch was purchased by RichardSmartasanadditiontohislegendaryParkerRanch,at one time the largest cattle ranch in the world. In 2002 Parker Ranch sold 200 acres at Puakea to a local developer who subdivided the land. The subdivision boundaries followed the many historic rock walls in the area. Sadly.large scale cattle ranching was discontinued.and many of the historic paniolo families moved out. Most recently,most of the existing structures on the 33 acre Puakea Ranch locus property have been renovated and are now reused as overnight accommodations for tourists. Criteria B: HAUN & ASSOCIATES 160 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 Dr.James Wight was born in India in 1814 of Scottish-Irish parentage and received his medical education at the University of Edinburgh in 1836. After practicing medicine for 13 years in Australia,the California gold rush encouraged him to leave for the United States with his family. His plans for immigration to American were thwarted,however,when his ship was wrecked off Mahukona. As doctors were scarce in Hawaii.he was persuaded to remain and opened a store/drug store in Kohala. Wright eventually sold the store to Samuel G.Wilder,another entrepreneur who later built a railway from Manukona to Kohala. Wight in 1852 became a Circuit Judge and served until 1863. Interested in politics,he was initially elected to the House of Representatives and later the House of Nobles under the Monarchy. Meanwhile.he had become interested in the cultivation of sugar cane,purchased a large interest in the Kohala Plantation,and established another plantation at Halawa. He also engaged in cattle ranching,establishing his operations at Puakea. In 1879 he was elected president of an association of planters and mill owners representing the Kohala area.During the era of the Republic of Hawaii,Dr. Wight was reported to have opposed the government's plans for annexation. He died on September 2,1905 at the age of 91. Criteria C: Puakea Ranch represents examples of Native Hawaiian.plantation.paniolo,and ethnic architecture and economies. As part of the North Kohala Field System,the walls demonstrate an understanding of climate,hydraulics,and horticulture by the first ethnic group.the Native Hawaiians. The initial area wall organization reflected the need to direct moisture collected on the upper slopes of the mountain store and store it at lower elevations experiencing more sunlight and less rainfall. The dryland stack walls that organize the properly itself represent a method of construction involving great amounts of physical labor that would be difficult to replicate or finance today. Building No.3 represents features of a Plantation style of architecture rather than paniolo style because... The existing different types of housing on the premesis reflect the social hierarchy of the ranch period. Single family houses would have been occupied by management while bunkhouses(early examples of duplex or quadplexes)were lived in by manual laborers. Limits to space,privacy,and ammenities would thus illustrate social station and occupation. The strong Japanese influence at this site in the ranch era is reflected in the number of traditional Japanese furo(bath) buildings.Japanese bathing,unlike western practice,involves washing oneself off first outside the bathing basin and then soaking in heated water for a period of time. Thus the structures contain separate areas for the initial cleaning and then the soaking practices. The recent upgrading of the paniolo structures reflects a mix of historic integrity and new amenities that the owners feel is necessary to attract tourists to stay overnight. Integrity is maintained by the use of mostly older materials,retention of the lot layout and open space,and non-disturbance of archaeological resources. Criteria D: As an active site during four distinct periods of occupation,the site holds archaeological potential. Photographs and an enclosed map illustrate this potential. As of this date,no detailed archaeological study has been done. Nomination to the Registers would encourage preservation of the site until funds become available. United States Department of the Interior National Park Service HAUN & ASSOCIATES 161 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Name of Property Countyand State 9. Major Bibliographical References Bibliography(Cite the books.articles,and other sources used in crewingthis form on one or more continuation sheets) Previous documentation on ale(1 $)Primary Marian al additional data: prekninerydetermination of indlridus Naig(38 CFR 87 has been StaleHabits Preservation Office Requested) Other Stale agency previously listed in the National Register Federal agency previous*determined eligible by the National Register Local government designateda National Historic Landmark University recorded by Historic American Buildingsgs Sae y •Other recorded by Historic American Engineering Record I Nene of repository-. Historic Resources Survey Number(il assigned): 10. Geographical Data Acreage of Property 33 acres Do not include previously listed resource acreage) UTM References Place additional UTM references on a continuation sheet) 1 5 826700.28 2240234.31 3 5 826730.36 2240271.74 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing 2 5 826715.31 224025292 4 5 826745.20 2240290.26 Zone Easting Northing Zone Easting Northing See continuation sheet) Verbal Boundary Description(describe the boundaries of the property) The property Is 33 acres m size.approximately 1 in shape,and Mm the largest single side lacing Mani Pile Highway. Propertyis eunourded by dry stacked rode wells. Boundary Justification(explain why the boundaries were selected) Boundary is iia Tax Map Key forthe parcel. 11.Form Prepared By name/tittle Cristie Cash and James Nelson organization Property Owners date 6/1/2009 street&number P.0.Box 6226 telephone (808)315-0805 city or town Hawi state Hawaii zip code 96719 6 HAUN &ASSOCIATES 162 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Punkas Ranch Haw*Htrwail name cd Property CantyaidState e-mail ZNIS11122airaga Additional Documentation Submit the following items with the completed form: Maps: A USGS map(7.5 or 15 minute series)indicating the property's location. A Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map. Continuation Sheets Additional items: (Check with the SI-IPO or FPO for any additional Items) HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 63 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510 - 022019 National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Puakea Ranch Haw,Hawau N/A Seaton rnenbe to Page 2 MYER STATES DEPARTMENT Of THE INTEINOR DEOLDOICAL SURVEY We*Ot 41111.14 rya..^. 114110111.14*,,, 104111101‘ : ., ' 440011011410: 0. ' i., slt Vicie404, 1/44, N„,-,..... ----- - 4.. s''. 4A 1/k.it il t' l;h",Y iiigip tS N A iiiiivic. I" .,11471 .it4,14kilie,st..... , 4 , ...i.v......dmak-10-..a.,... ,,: tki: 0. NAtviott .....„„_,..L. Ad 14 ' - " 6. 4 3 1 •4414k ' --/1 N. ``.,fi " 1, '«^ ylit" t L . United States Department of the Interior National Park Service HAUN &ASSOCIATES 164 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 National Register of Historic Places Continuation Sheet Puakea Ranch Haw,Mango N/A Saclen'unbar 10 RIM 3 mo- eaa) X a.)N 4-, 9 C C 1 i 1 in 2 .i .•G. He 0 ii gli D - Oa 11 ilr; c r, ol RA 0 c cc ccc f,mg ...,- ..... I.11— i4 a iT p 14 AI4a: - - - - • ir• .4 C. 4,,5,, ,0' c •c wc iil't •C 2r4 2'4 2.4 2.4 M ti ft V 0 0 0 II0 0 0,2 4 4.4 r-=0 x 2- t 81! N.,.. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 65 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 Puakea Ranch Haweli,Hook Name of Property County and State Photographs: Submit clear and descriptive black and white photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels at 300 ppl pixels per inch)or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:timid County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Puska,.Ranch ki relation to other Kohala properties. 1 of 19. 1:-1 i 7'4- k.. *.z 17-. ---.4.--7,4,,,..", v, 4.7,-.*' •••• ' , Y" ,,,_. na 114.'"*. '*'''• i -•',,,,44'1****9-;*,...:"12t'''''. 10\91111)". --'t!• •S.,... dill.I-9: es.•-s. ‘ A - a ;a 111.3."' NW......filL ' Aga 4.: 4... 0.'. 46"_..7"1"..tfr' Sr* iiii, ''‘.. ,-- • ' I7iiik, . . rt iii sob-l'it., op. lleSii 111""nr If ."'VA - F.--: oikali.,... 8- 1.52, iii.— 00...-....... ....„4.........38, impou 11 ..- 1 r---- 1.111- 1 4 i moms, 411IIg:. :• . . •1.1 It"1111114 I'e r41107::''' 0, 00:: to..,... ,, A aigw. opt. .,.. 2. „.............. 1.0,1•"''A7. 00 . *". ..,--0MIS ---. lr'"-__,..,,.,r...pr ,•-•, ,.....4* = -.9-9, - ' 911:zr., ,...•• a ••••""--------"if'----.-..''--'-'7..' 1' '''''',..''' 0....Cf We, ow$,••I f elft ...r "Atam. t l• ' ligni.X1,4f5^V 40.f a.... PLAK6A RA.X fi AT 9 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 66 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 -6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,NItlifiaiiNaritaofProputfCountyand- - Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Relationships of buildings and major ruins on Puakea Ranch. 2 of 19. S lit 4 144iaAtli t eiviltro e 11.4 I lit 1 I f 1 1 It I 1 ii 1 11,k. 1 l'imr 1 t 1 11 11 i t 1 It tl k 1 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 67 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Raa ch Hawaii,Hawaa Name d Property Countyand State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photographs)and number: Map of Puakea Ranch showing stone walls in relation to property lines,buildings,and roads. 3 of 19. t ani i . 1...:1 .; .,' i :.., 1. • ..,4 ic iill:C., • e• iLLJ _ t.., Yf yif# y co nq et 8 Of S '` HAUN &ASSOCIATES 168 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-00 1 : Por. 082 Report No . 1 5 10 -0 2 2 0 1 9 Puakea Ranch Haw*Hawaii Name of Properly County and&ate Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Row of Java Plumb trees planted in the late 1870s. 4 of 19. 4: 4 4/ 4 . 12 HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 69 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6- 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Ramat HawaiiNameofPropertyauntymidSW. Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(*)argil nennber: Old Sugar Mill stack before it fell in earthquake. 5 of 19. 7r, i! Jib! Ye HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 70 13 ° I. ' 082TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - -6 - 001 : Report No . 1510 -022019 Hawail,Havai CoureY and Slate RAMS RINICh Name al P/"IY Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi Hawaii State: HawaiiCounty: Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: 1870 brick in Mill stack rubble. 6 of 19 AIM*. i."; 107'- i,4•-, 4...,,.....4-1'4,'.1 . •...:1, -•!.OP I,-,;::..-,: •'---"*-7-t; - 4 HAUN &ASSOCIATES 1 71 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawk,Hawaii Name of Property CountyandState Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer.Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Old Sugar Mill site looking southwest. 7 of 19. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 72 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-02201 9 Rakes Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Name of Pmperty County and State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Vintage cow corral from the 1940s, 8 of 19. HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 73 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch HawaiiHawaii Nameof Property County and State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Building Numoer 5 showing shingles on wall. 9 of 19. tr HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 74 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6- 001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Rh Hawat HawedmeofPropertyCountyandt3tata Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Building Number 5 showing different wall construction on opposite wall. 10 of 19. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 75 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Name of Property CountyandStd Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii Seim Hath Photographer.Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Building Number 4. 12 of 19. mea: tiFtS' '40'F" HAUN &ASSOCIATES 176 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-02201 9 Pa**Handl Haw*Haw* N*ne Property Gnu*and State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County:Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer: Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Building,....,Number 4 from the left side. 13 of 19. f. "..;.. r . ....0rr r.--2'.• iii7 '',.. , 1 • 7. , . , 4111 . .".'''' HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 77 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Name of Property County arxi State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Exterior of two(Japanese style-bath house)adjacent to SuMktg 4. 14 of 19. t HAUN &ASSOCIATES 178 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510- 022019 Puakea Ramh Ham*Havatil NamedProperty County and Ens* Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Building No.2. 15 of 19. 11' 40, 1, 410fC HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 79 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Have*Hank Name of Property Casty mid SUM" Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Interior,Building No.2. 16 of 19. HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 80 TMK : ( 3 ) 5- 6-001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Nowak.Hawaii NameofProperty • CountyantSt* Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Original bathtub.Building 1. 17 of 19. HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 8 1 Report No . 1510TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 - 001 : Por . 082 022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,Hawaii Name of Property Countyand State Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Living room,building No.1. 18 of 19. II iii HAUN &ASSOCIATES 182 TMK : ( 3 ) 5-6-001 : Por. 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Puakea Ranch Hawaii,Haw*"Name of Property Ootrity and Stele Name of Property: Puakea Ranch City or Vicinity:Hawi County: Hawaii State: Hawaii Photographer:Tax Map Date Photographed: 2009 Description of Photograph(s)and number: Lanai and view.Building No. 1 19 of 19. Li]-44 4;04.rgelleitiht.vt* 4:', 74600•44frk::115.1,-trfliakspi,; 01° Paperwork Reduction Act Statenttmt: This information is being coUected for acabons tothe National Register ofHistoric Pieces tocPiscestapropertiesforbohneordetermineeggibetytarlistingtofistpoppeltiesandtoamendexistingitstintherequestremotoredtob beApt,as amended(16 U.S C 460 et seq.). EstimatednehtnaccordanceBuidenth StatementtheNaPt*ubnal lcHistoricrepress1PbteZnator thisMon e est to average 18 hours per response tncludIng time forevemanag ng thburden estimate or apeisnstruct*ns'gathe''ng and maultalivingdida.end completing and Mewing the form Direct comments regardttenor.1849 C Street.NW, Washington.DCthisformtotheOnceofPlanningandPaitonnanceManagementUSDepttothe HAUN &ASSOCIATES I 83 TMK : ( 3 ) 5 - 6 -001 : Por . 082 Report No . 1510-022019 Maharnoku Hanalei,HAMM Name or Property County and State Paperwork Reduction Act Statement: This information is being collected kir applications to the National HogMir of Historic Places to nominate properties lc,listing or determine eligrbilrty for listing,to list properties and to amend existing listaapit. Responsetotisrequest is MOW 10 obtarn a benefit in accordance with the National Historic Preservation Act as amended 116 U S.0 460 et seq.). Estimated Burden Statement Public reporting burden for this form is estimated to average 1$heirs per response Int:kiting time for reviewing instructions gathering and maintaining data,and completing and reviewing the form Direct comments regarding this buMen estimate or any aspect of this form to the Office of Planning and Performance Management US Dept to the interior.1849 C.Strut NW Washington,DC F HAUN & ASSOCIATES I 84 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawai`i Appendix 4 SHPD Correspondence LINDA LAURA A*,\f81 *f BOOMMI tSAIIDNATIZALIONOUSCIS yYr}" COuNISSWOl MIIMISOlaCEtlatAGIMU n7 SI. ? KENC.KAWAIMA A MIRYMEC=-MATER CRY • MAIMAMMUANUCIWZION DtOR400fCO11VEY/= COMMISSIONONWATIMMISOUNCISDNAGSMENT COASIALIAOS STATE OF HAWAII COISSVAIRNINPISSOIRCIVROMODMIT ANDWIDUR, DEPARTMENT OF LAND AND NATURAL RESOURCES AIION aAmosAAMaawa cuaassioN LOW STATE HISTORICPRESERVATION DIVISION STATEPAM 601 KAMOKII.ABOULEVARD,ROOM 555 KAPOLEI,HAWAII 96707 August 10,2009 LOG: 2009.3680 DOC: O908RS1OD Cristie Cash and James Nelson P.O.Box 6226 Hawi,HI 96719 Dear Ms.Cash and Mr.Nelson, SUBJECT: PUAKEA RANCH 56-2864 Akoni Pule Hig TMK: (3)5-6-001:082 The Hawaii Historic Places Review Board is pleased to officially inform you that at its hearing held on August 8, 2009, a decision was made to place the property described above on the Hawaii Register of Historic Places. The Board has also recommended to the State Preservation Officer that the property be nominated for the National Register of Historic Places. If you have any questions, please contact Ross W. Stephenson at (808) 692-8028 or ross.w.stephenson@hawaii.gov. Sincerely yours, Dr.Kiyo Ikeda Chairperson Cc: Planning Department County of Hawaii 101 Pauahi Street,Suite 3 Hilo,HI96720 LINDA LINGLE g.0F,Hy LAURA H.THIELEN GOVERNOR OF HAWAII Ap••95H ••9 CHAIRPERSON BOARDOFLANDANDNATURALRESOURCES Ed Ai,.t COMMISSION ONWATER RESOURCEMANAGEMENT d ca.° !,__:%.„. 1 * :KEN C.KAWAHARA11 1,141 .:§..- !DEPUTYDIRECTOR.WATER i 11.1.........! e„..., ATICRESOURCES BOATMIGUAND OCEAN RECREATIONo = v NW B BUREAU E CONVEYANCESCOMMISSIONONWATERRESOURCEMANAGEMENT CONSERVATION ANDCOASTALLANDS Stab:,ENGINEERINGSTATEOFHAWAIICONSERVA77GNAND> ENFORCEMENT THAWi FORESTRYAND WILDLIFEDEPARTMENTOFLANDANDNATURALRESOURCESHISTORICPRESERVATION KAHOOLAWEISLAND RESERVECOMMISSION LAND STATE HISTORIC PRESERVATION DIVISION STATEPARKS 601 KAMOKILA BOULEVARD,ROOM 555 KAPOLEI,HAWAII 96707 DATE: July 28,2010 LOG: 2010.2698 DOC: 1007RS53 TO:Christie Cash and James Nelson Puakea Ranch 65-1126 Puu Opelu Road Kamuela,HI 96743 SUBJECT:Section 6E-42 Historic Preservation Review/Puakea Ranch Rezoning Request and Future Restoration Projects Permit: (None) Owner: Christie Cash and James Nelson Location: 65-1126 Puu Opelu Road,Kamuela,HI 96743 Tax Map Key: (3)5-6-001:082 This letter is in response to your communication of July 15,2010,received by our office on July 19,2010,re your desires to both convert the Puakea Ranch property into a"Guest Ranch"through issuance of a Special Use Permit(SUP)Application and to undertake restoration ofyour ranch facilities. The area of potential effect would be the Ranch property itself. Concerning the rezoning: we understand that four of your buildings are used as vacation rentals. The present zoning is AG-20. Under existing County of Hawaii law you are allowed one primary residence in the AG-20 zone. If any of the other three buildings are damaged by more than 50 per cent,you would not be allowed to reconstruct them. The SUP would allow you to insure your rentals. At your initiative,the Puakea Ranch was placed on the Hawaii Register of Historic PIaces as No. 80-10-02-9071 on August 8, 2009. The property was inhabited by Native Hawaiians,paniolos,and sugar plantation workers and contains artifacts ofeach period. SHPD determines that the rezoning would have no effect on historic property because it would have no physical impact and simply continue existing uses. As for your desire to restore historic features of the property,we recommend two important steps: Have a qualified archaeologist conduct an archaeology inventory survey of the property. Very Iikely this would identify more resources and provide recommendations for preservation. Hire an architectural firm with expertise in historic preservation. Such experts can greatly facilitate the reconstruction process. We can provide you with lists of archaeologists and architects who can help you. We applaud the considerable research that you have already conducted on your property. We look forward to working with you, your archaeologist,and your architect. It is a great project. Any questions should be addressed to Ross W.Stephenson,SHPD Historian,at(808)692-8028(office),(808)497-2233(cell), or ross.w.stephenson@hawaii.gov. ah. o for the opp nity to comment. Pu. •iu 1eC???4) . Administrator, In the event that historic resources, including human skeletal remains, lava tubes, and lava blisters/bubbles are identified during construction activities,all work should cease in the immediate vicinity of the find, the find should be protected from additional disturbance,and the State Historic Preservation Division should be contacted immediately at(808)692-8015. about:blank On Jul 23, 2018, at 1:25 PM, Downer, Alan 5 <alan.s.downer( hawaii.gov> wrote: Aloha Christie: My answers (together with my assumptions) are embedded in your email below. Please let me now if you have further questions. Hope this helps. Alan From: Christie Cash [mailto:christiecashOme.com] Sent: Monday, July 23, 2018 9:41 AM To: Downer, Alan S <alan.s.downerPhawaii.gov> Cc: Jeff Darrow <ieff.darrowCc hawaiicounty.00v>; Yoon, Kaiwi N kaiwi.n.yoonc hawaii.gov> Subject: Fwd: Renting Historic Homes on Puakea Ranch Aloha Alan, Thank you for clarifying just a few more questions as we work toward submitting our special permit application. Alan Haun & Associates contacted DLNR to discuss any requirements for SHPD- Architecture Branch compliance in support of the Special Permit application. Kaiwi called him back and indicated that No architecture study (SOI) was needed because the register nomination form essentially completes that process. Agreed. An architectural inventory is not required. Alan said Kaiwi questioned as to why one would do an archaeological inventory survey at all, since the entire property is already a historic site. I would assume just the area where the pavilion was built and any potential new construction sites, as if we were applying for a grading permit, would be the area to be covered in the AIS. The cost of this report varies significantly depending on the size and scope of the area specific being surveyed. I need to give the archeologist clear boundaries based on whatever SHPD -DLNR are requiring of us as it relates to the special permit area, non historic features and new construction only. I would like to request that SHPD- DLNR review our permit application and then determine the area needing an AIS. Is this possible? An archaeological inventory survey is not required for the entire property. However, an archaeological inventory survey should be carried out for any area that will have new 1 of 4 11/11/19, 2:34 PM about:blank ground disturbance, together with a reasonable buffer zone around the new disturbance. This must include areas, if any, where new underground utilities will be installed and where they will connect with existing utilities. To the extent that this work relates to permitting the exiting pavilion, in order to determine the need for any archaeological work related to that I would need to have a description of that nature and extent of the ground disturbance associated with its construction. Kiawi also shared with Alan that he thinks it is unlikely that the review board will grant a boundary amendment or reduction in the site area. Jeff Darrow is waiting for letter to add us to the Cultural Review Board tour on August 8th. I need to submit a letter to be added to this agenda if we are going for the size reduction from site to features and homes. The site size reduction, to just the existing historic features, not the entire 33 ac, was your recommendation. I am aware that the Architecture Branch staff seems to feel that the Board will not approve your proposed boundary adjustment. SHPD has nothing to do with other than reviewing the proposed amendment. SHPD does not make a recommendation to the Board on nominations as the Board has made it clear that the decision is the Board's alone and does not want SHPD to make a recommendation; so we don't . We do, on those instances when the Board asks, advise the Board of what the regulations say or what NPS guidance is on an particular point. But the decision making is entirely prerogative of the Board. Mr. Yoon can't say what the Board will do, making any prediction is potentially misleading. Although I realize this is not helpful, but the only way to know what the Board will do is to present it for a decision. A detailed site survey map of all historic features was submitted with the Historic nomination and is included in our file. SHPD archeologists visited the site as part of the nomination and have approved of the maps and details provided. Detailed historic and cultural information, articles, photos, maps, etc. relating to the property are included with our historic nomination. Would this not cover most of what is required in the CIS, similar to the SOI reports already done for the nomination? CIS? Do you mean AIS? Is you mean AIS, I recommend that you have Dr. Haun contact Dr .Susan Lebo, SHPD's Archaeology Branch chief to discuss what, if anything, additional information needs to be incorporated into the documentation submitted for your project. While I think the documentation of the historic features on the surface is complete, archaeology often has minimal surface manifestation, so relying on identification of obvious architectural featurs alone may not be sufficient. Can you please comment on and clarify these questions for us as we are in full swing of the special permit application process and trying to expedite as much as possible. Thank you so much for you help. 2 of 4 11/11/19, 2:34 PM about:blank Aloha, Christie Begin forwarded message: From: "Downer, Alan 5" <alan.s.downerfthawaii.gov> Subject: RE: Renting Historic Homes on Puakea Ranch Date: July 18, 2018 at 7:59:21 PM PDT To: Christie Cash <christiePpuakearanch.com> Cc: "Yoon, Kaiwi N" <kaiwi.n.yoonhawaii.gov> Aloha Christie: I'm not sure I understand why you are asking SHPD this question. As long as the historic homes are outside of the area in which construction will occur, it would seem to me that the historic homes need ont be included in the permit application. But the area covered and what needs to be in your permit application is a matter for the County, not SHPD. Let me know if I've misunderstood your quesiton. Alan Original Message From: Yoon, Kaiwi N Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 3:43 PM To: Downer, Alan S <alan.s.downerc hawaii.gov> Subject: FW: Renting Historic Homes on Puakea Ranch aloha e Alan, As this project may or soon to be in litigation, I defer to your comments. mahalo, Kaiwi Original Message From: Christie Cash [mailto:christiecash( me.com] Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 10:40 AM To: Yoon, Kaiwi N <kaiwi.n.yoon(a hawaii.00v> Cc: Jeff Darrow <ieff.darrow( hawaiicounty.gov>; Horace Yanagi hvanagiChawaiicountv.gov>; Wilson, Kelly Kelly.WilsonPhawaiicounty.gov>; Christina Ohira <cohiraPstarnlaw.com> 3 of 4 11/11/19, 2:34 PM about:blank Subject: Renting Historic Homes on Puakea Ranch Aloha, I have some questions regarding the existing historic homes that are being used as vacation rentals as they relate to our special permit application. I was not planning on including the existing historic homes in the special permit because they are considered legal non conforming homes, allowing me to rent them with out a special permit. My understanding is these homes are now grandfathered into this property any may be rented legally, on going, without a special permit. The special permit relates specifically to the 15 ac space where "non AG activities" would be allowed on the property. New building plans will be included in the Special Permit application, having nothing to do with the existing historic homes or historic register. What, if anything else, is required of me to submit to the county, as it relates to continuing to short term rent the existing 5 historic structures without issue and not including them in the special permit. Thank you, Christie 4 of 4 11/11/19, 2:34 PM November 26, 2018 Dr.Alan Downer,Administrator State Historic Preservation Division Department of Land and Natural Resources 601 Kamokila Blvd., Suite 555 Kapolei HI 96707 Subject: TMK: (3) 5-6-001:082 Puakea Ahupua'a, North Kohala,the Historic Puakea Ranch, SHPD Site Number: 50-10-35-9109 as a re adaptive use as a "Guest Ranch"with issuance of a Special Permit. Dear Dr. Downer, I am writing for formally request a letter of no significant impact from SHPD with regard to operating Puakea Ranch as a"Guest Ranch", offering short term over night accommodations and activities to visitors and the community. Four of the existing historic structures have been restored and are meticulously cared for to accommodate a discerning guest. While the homes do not offer A/C or closets,they are charming for a shorter stay, allowing us to manage maintenance and repairs on an uncommon schedule of constant care. This attention to detail and cleanliness ensures the prolonged legacy of this important site in Hawaii's sugar and ranching histories. The 100+year-old vegetation that surrounds the entire 33 acre property is an unparalleled location for enjoying the outdoor beauty of North Kohala in a park like setting. Towering Mango and Monkey Pod trees planted over 100 years ago offer welcoming shaded areas with sweeping ocean views. Large vegetable gardens, fruit trees of all varieties,pineapple groves,lavender groves and farm fresh eggs are all part of the rich agricultural and historic experience we offer to our guests. Horse back riding, equine therapy, gardening, canning, cooking,yoga, painting,pottery and other creative enrichment activities and programs will be made available to our guests and community within a special permit. We have created a living legacy that tells the story of the Puakea Ranch beginning in 1850 when Dr.James Wight arrived in Mahukona. Puakea Ranch serves as a reminder to all who visit,the dedication, simple living and love that was poured into the land,the animals, and the merging cultures coming to Hawaii Island to serve the sugar and ranching industries. North Kohala was then and still remains a true melting pot of culture and humanity. It is our intention is to continue to support and protect these historic homes by allowing guests to enjoy them while also learning about the stories of the people who once lived in and created them. Many of the historic structures that once graced these 33 acres have been lost to time. Foundations,vintage photos and verbal memories from Thema, Masa, Margaret and Robert Kawamoto, detailing their memories of what once was, are all that remains. I am deeply grateful I was able to meet with these people and they have shared valuable family photos that I am now able to share with our guests, keeping the history alive. The remaining historic buildings are clearly identified for our guests. Any new additions are also clearly identified as such. The true significance of this property is the multiple generations of families who lived and worked this land and who helped shape the community of North Kohala beginning in the mid 1800's. Without properties like Puakea Ranch and our efforts to save the rest of the structures from the ravishes of time, salt,wind and rain, Puakea Ranch would be nothing more than another"Gentlemen's Ranch"with one NEW Grand Home, closed to the rest of the word and this community. This site is currently zoned AG 20 allowing only one home. All of the structures would have been torn down to make room for a new single-family residence,much like the surrounding neighboring lots. I have jumped through so many hoops with the county just to save this property and the legacy of the men and woman who helped shape a new culture in Hawaii. My efforts with the State and County are to ensure Puakea Ranch continues to perpetuate the legacy of pre contact, sugar, ranching and the Paniolo history in North Kohala. Masa Kawamoto was honored as "King of the Cowboys" and won many top honors through out his career as a lifetime Parker Ranch cowboy along with his older brother Yoshi Kawamoto. Puakea Ranch acts as a living museum where guests come face to face with the vintage photos of the original Paniolo's who built the homes and stacked the rock on the walls that our guests inhabiting. The art form of traditional tree saddles and hand woven rawhide ropes are part of the decor in the homes,honoring this fading Hawaiian Paniolo tradition. Through my research, I have uncovered and saved for the future of Hawaii preservation, newspaper articles,historic photos,video recordings and verbal accounts of Puakea Ranch and the surrounding area, dating back to the 1850's. This information is a"time capsule" of the history of Puakea Ranch. Housing this information, photos and physical works salvaged from the grounds, for future generations is the gift of Puakea Ranch to our community. The ongoing and constant up keep and care needed to manage this property is immense and expensive. It takes a village of committed people who work both for the love of the property and the community but also to make a living. Many people within our community benefit from the employment opportunities Puakea Ranch offers. Opening and sharing this property with visitors and hosting special occasions like elopements, family reunions or 1st birthday parties are necessary to financially support this property. This in turn contributes to the overall economy of not only North Kohala,but our entire island. The physical aspects of Puakea Ranch will no doubt be altered over time. Change is never easy when our hearts are attached to something. The history of Puakea Ranch and the men and women who put their stamp on this land will forever be remembered through my efforts of documentation and preservation. This property and land has never stopped changing. From a Hawaiian community, to a sugar mill community to a ranching community,to single family homes to subdividing and "Mc Mansions"being built all around it,there has been constant change. My efforts to restore the structures,put the property on the historic register and support the ongoing up keep with a small business, inline with our community values,that is now a gathering place for community events and offers employment opportunities to local residence of North Kohala, is truly and asset to the island of Hawaii. It is my sincere hope that SHPD recognizes the value and importance of a special permit to allow me to operate Puakea Ranch as a business advertised as a Guest Ranch". In my opinion,this is the highest and best use for Puakea Ranch into the future. My intention with any construction is to adhere to the plantation era vernacular. Further, I am always looking for an opportunity to recuse a building in need and consider re locating a historic structure to the property that reflects the North Kohala Architecture of the periods between 1850-1950, in line with all remaining structures on site. I have attached the letter from Haun&Associates which includes a site map. I have also attached a building chart detailing the entire 33-ac property,all historic structures, remaining foundations and proposed/potential new or recycled structures of the future. Also attached are photographs of the existing un permitted pavilion structure as referred to in in the field inspection letter from Haun&Associates. I understand that any future new construction will require a SHPD 6 E 3 review process. We are completing an Environmental Assessment and AIS field inspections. Those detailed reports will be submitted prior to the Special Permit Application. The AIS detailed written reports will be done in approximately 1 week. If there is any more information and or documentation you feel you need to support my request,please let me know. Thank again for all of your time and effort. With aloha, Christie Cash Puakea Ranch ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT PUAKEA GUEST RANCH TMK: (3rd) 5-6-001:082 Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawai`i Island, State of Hawai`i Appendix 5 Traffic Assessment Report Traffic Assessment Report for Puakea Guest Ranch Puakea, North Kohala District, Hawaii County TMK: (3)5-6-001 :082 C 4, ,,, . Pes ic:_9203frC */ 448P40 9_,Y This work was prepared by me or under my supervision and construction of this project ill be under y •.servation. 1 IA JAM S M. ' DERSEN P.E. Expires: 04/30/2020 NOVEMBER 18, 2019 JPE CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING POBOX 551751 Kapa'au HI 96755 808-854-4888 INTRODUCTION: This report summarizes the findings of a traffic assessment for the proposed Puakea Guest Ranch. This Traffic Assessment generally describes the anticipated impact to traffic based upon when the project is completed. Comments provided by the Hawaii State Department ofTransportation dated January 7, 2019 and October 9, 2019 were reviewed and incorporated into this report. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The owners are requesting a Special Permit for use as a Guest Ranch,which would continue vacation rentals and provide facilities that would allow for various functions including weddings and community events. The project involves the adaptation of existing Puakea Ranch structures, four of which are currently used as vacation rentals, and construction of new ones, to develop a Guest Ranch. The Guest Ranch would be able to accommodate as many as 38 guests in the seven rental units and event area, an increase from the current limit of 18. It would host group activities such as weddings and family reunions,which would be accommodated in the new event area. A maximum number of persons on property at any given time for private guest events will be limited to 100 additional non-guests. Events with more than 38 attendees will be limited to 9am - 8pm, (Sunday- Thursday), 9am-1Opm Friday, Saturday). Obtaining the Special Permit would allow the Guest Ranch to offer activities, opportunities and events to guests, local schools, community and seniors groups to experience ranch life and learn about the history of the surrounding area,plantation life, the Paniolo, Japanese and native Hawaiian cultures that make North Kohala what it is today. The Puakea Guest Ranch would like to host up to two community events annually that will allow up to 350 guests. For these one-day community events, event hours will be limited to 9am-9pm (Sunday), 9am-1Opm (Friday and Saturday). The Puakea Guest Ranch is located in North Kohala on Hawaii Island, approximately two miles before Hawi Town, Tax Map Key(TMK) (3) 5-6-001:082 (see Figure 1). The 32.4 acre parcel is approximately 1.4 miles inland from the coast, immediately mauka of Akoni Pule Highway, State Route 270. There is one proposed access point to the parcel off the mauka side ofAkoni Pule Highway. It is an existing paved driveway near the 18 mile marker. EXISTING TRAFFIC CONDITIONS: Akoni Pule Highway, State Route 270, is a facility under the control of the Hawai'i State Department of Transportation(HDOT). It provides access to Kawaihae Harbor and also serves as the belt road to Hawi town. It is classified as a Rural Minor Arterial. It is a two-lane undivided State highway with 12' wide lanes and paved shoulders. The posted speed limit along the main stretch of this roadway is 55 1 miles per hour(mph)with a gradual decline to 25 mph near towns. The posted speed limit at the entrance to the project site is currently 55 mph, although there has been a proposed reduction to 45 mph for this area. Directional traffic is generally symmetric for this area of Route 270. The existing traffic volume data is published by the HDOT as an Annual Average Daily Traffic Count, or AADT,which is a measure of the average number of cars that travel on that section of roadway in a given day. HDOT gathers AADT through a combination of permanent, in-ground traffic counting stations, overhead cameras, and temporary traffic counters or tubes. The 2017 HDOT data for this stretch of Akoni Pule Highway shows an AADT of 3,100 (see Figure 2). HDOT has not published Future Baseline Traffic Reports for Akoni Pule Highway. Regardless, it is expected to remain as a minor arterial with minimal increase in use. The North Kohala District has recently seen relatively minor growth rates around 1.05%. Most of that growth activity has been, and is predicted to be, located south of this project site. The access to Puakea Bay Ranch subdivision is on the west side of the same intersection. There are no traffic controls at this intersection. Traffic to and within Puakea Bay Ranch subdivision is extremely low and does not present traffic congestion problems. Puakea Bay Ranch is comprised of 42 parcels. Currently there are less than twenty homes in the development. The gatehouse at the entrance is manned seven days a week with 24 hour key code access for the owners. The Puakea Ranch access includes an easement to allow for shared access to the two parcels mauka of the project site. Currently those two lots are undeveloped, traffic is accordingly insignificant. PROJECT TRAFFIC: The proposed project will generate an increase in vehicle traffic on Akoni Pule Highway once the Guest Ranch is in operation.Access to the project site is on the mauka side of Akoni Pule Highway approximately 0.1 mile past the 18 mile marker. Puakea Ranch currently employs a crew of eight part time staff,two full time salary employees and pulls from local outside contractors as needed. When the Guest Ranch is operating an additional five employees are anticipated. Typical work hours are between and would continue to be between 8:00am and 4:00pm. The increase in daily round trips is expected to be 10 round trips per day representing less than 1% of the current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. The guest traffic is more generalized. For current rentals, Puakea Ranch typically sees one vehicle per each of the four rental units. These guests may leave once or twice a day.With the increase to seven units,the guest traffic is expected to approximately increase by five round trips per day.Again, representing less than 1% ofthe current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. Hosted events represent a more significant impact. For a typical guest event, Puakea Ranch anticipates approximately five vendor vehicles in and out along with an additional 20-25 vehicles for attendees. Event traffic is typically focused around sunset hours, approximated to be between 4:00pm and 9:45pm. Event guests usually car-pool and/or organize shuttles. This practice will be encouraged. The 30 round trips for that day ofthe event still represent less than 1% of the current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. The large community events represent the greatest expected impact. These one-day events are to be limited to only one or two per year. The owner plans to coordinate with traffic services in order to ensure the free flow ofvehicles through the project entrance. An event like this is expected to host up to 2 eight vendor vehicles and approximately 88 attendee vehicles. These round trips focused on only one or two days per year only represent 3.5% of the current traffic load on Akoni Pule Highway. The typical trigger for preparing a Traffic Impact Report(TIR), contained in the HDOT Best Practices for Traffic Impact Reports, is 100 or more new peak hour trips or 500 daily trips. The relatively minor increase due to this project does not register that trigger and is therefore not expected to cause a significant impact. ACCESS TO AKONI PULE HIGHWAY: The existing driveway appears adequate to serve the proposed project. According to HDOT records, the paved driveway is the original constructed in 1972 and is 18' wide. It is fully paved the approximately 100'through the property line and has tapered radii extending both directions. HDOT Highways Hawaii District Engineer will be consulted regarding any improvements to the access to Akoni Pule Highway,Route 270. No parking will be allowed along Route 270. This stretch ofhighway is relatively wide open with well maintained mowed grass beyond the shoulders. Site distances are easily pushing 1000' in both directions. The owner has expressed interest in installing a STOP line to encourage guests leaving the property to fully stop prior to approaching the highway access. No parking is allowed along Route 270. There is a potential for project-induced secondary effects on Route 270 traffic safety during hosted events. If traffic issues attributable to the site operations are identified,the owners will mitigate the impact to the satisfaction of HDOT,Hawaii District Engineer.A permit to perform work upon state highways will be submitted for any work within the highway right-of-way. CONCLUSION: Project related traffic is not expected to have any significant impacts to Akoni Pule Highway due to the low volume of employees and guests that would access the site. HDOT Highways Hawaii District Engineer will be consulted regarding any improvements to the existing access to Route 270. REFERENCES: Hawai`i Department of Transportation, Hawaii Department of Transportation Best Practices for Traffic Impact Reports, May 2011. Hawai`i Department of Transportation, Hawaii Department of Transportation Highways Program Status, 2017, (histategis.maps.arcgis.com). The Institute of Transportation Engineers, Trip Generation Manual, 9th Edition, 2012. Hawai`i Department of Transportation, Hawaii Department of Transportation Guidelines for Project- Level Traffic Forecasting , December 2015. County of Hawai'i,Department of Finance, Real Property Tax Division, 2018. County of Hawai'i, Planning Department, General Plan, 2005. Belt Collins &Associates, Final Environmental Assessment, 1993-05-08-HA-FEA-Puakea-Bay-Ranch- Passive-Park, 1993. 3 74' f KAMi m•.. - lbw 4.24 ip.v ..,..00,04tti‘t,rf_.:, ,-, 4111110011i + i. ' jtARMA at-':.:::.'• :..1:',12.;..---4-r.!• 7•4km''.'":1- _,;47,.. ,. iiiik''' '' . , ' 9k flPIIIPP4111111111rillitEYma, vorr4°1 yY AIL F iy is.'' cr Ef :.,!!.:' 11. iL w N ilk b1. wr law inor--....-*444)4,1114,4* , :-. -- wr=girmuniii-- _. , ....,:,:-.:"1 tirr iii orli w lip fa-004i -. . . 1 ti. 40ilivitt— A 43,0 4. low. wa.7-..,-.7.• "NO, .'.. -,..;......A",,,,,,2:,,, Irklk.-,- ',.. 4i4,-Apiiil.,-' ' • : siotts„ t btA n FIGURE 1: VICINITY MAP 4 HOOT Highways Program Status tri AnnualAverage 0e0y7raffkCaw.ac MDT;isameasure i oftheaveragenumberofmarsthatgewlendirtsedan roaaraymagxendata onroach yseta...BatsDent.oountsfaNat tonOfroad. TraffltCount2017-TrafgcCauntData2017_EYCNTOErents Category 175000 0775000 5125000 AnnualAverage DailyTraffic(AADT;Count.sroo5?DOW 515000 15000 o m.zw S PAVES Esm HmRE Gams NG:_.SSGS FIGURE 2: HDOT TRAFFIC COUNT 5 Puakea Guest Ranch Environmental Assessment this page intentionally left blank]